Uk General Election 2005

Which political party would/will you vote for?

  • Labour (Tony Blair)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Conservative (Michael Howard)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Liberal Democrat (Charles Kennedy)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • UKIP (Roger Knapman)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Veritas (Robert Kilroy-Silk)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Plaid Cymru (Dafydd Iwan)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Green (Keith Taylor)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • British National (Nick Griffin)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Third Way

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Liberals

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Legalise Cannabis Alliance

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Pensioners

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Any of the myriad of Socialist/Communist Parties

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Official Monster Raving Loony (Alan 'Howling Laud' Hope)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

LHC posted on Apr 11 2005 at 10:43 PM said:
PinkSpider posted on Apr 11 2005 at 09:57 PM said:
Dude at thats like what the Nazi's preached.
Actually it's the total opposite.

edit: except the "no children for the poor part", that's just insanity
Well yes, the Nazi's where the National Socialist Party afterall but you got my point?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kknd_cf posted on Apr 11 2005 at 09:23 PM said:
I've got to agree with Pinkspider here. If you didn't have poor people who would inhabit the houses built by the other working classes? How would the bigwigs feel then when they have to demolish their houses? How much extra money is that? Who would man the bulldozers? Who would make your food, clean your toliets, order your online games and do every little extra thing that's probably never crossed your mind.

these people have jobs, thus there is no problem.

kknd_cf posted on Apr 11 2005 at 09:23 PM said:
One of the main arguments for immigration at the moment is Britain's lack of people wanting to be labourers because of lots of people going to university. Do you want labour to decrease that even more so? Because without the little guys the fat guys in the board meetings can't get their coffee.

no, i want there to be viable options for people to be able to get jobs. for example, the government is screwed with the building of heathrow terminal five, not enough skilled labour to make the bloody thing.

if migrants can fill these positions, go for it. you'll notice i said i have no problem with migration.

LHC posted on Apr 11 2005 at 09:43 PM said:
except the "no children for the poor part", that's just insanity

why is this insanity? if people without jobs have no children to support then less money is needed by social security. if these people have no children then there are less people growing up already in poverty. it just baffles me that people already on welfare can logically be allowed to have/have more kids.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PinkSpider posted on Apr 11 2005 at 10:03 PM said:
LHC posted on Apr 11 2005 at 10:43 PM said:
PinkSpider posted on Apr 11 2005 at 09:57 PM said:
Dude at thats like what the Nazi's preached.
Actually it's the total opposite.

edit: except the "no children for the poor part", that's just insanity
Well yes, the Nazi's where the National Socialist Party afterall but you got my point?

They really werent

They began as National Socialists, bit then when Hitler began plotting his rule by manipulationg thee smaller parties they moved on to being the Nazis and became distant with the National Socialist tag
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just realised I forgot to vote in the poll.

A bit like 41% of the country did 4 years ago.

*Boom boom chish*


Edit: Two people voted BNP....who was it? This isn't a secret ballot ;)
 
Spray; the Government would NEVER be allowed in this country to tell the poor they couldnt have children unless their was some kind of population issue which their clearly is not.

Also you want to take away Social Security? Something that keeps many people alive?! Gah.

Sigh I cant be assed BUT the one thing I do know is this country will never go as extreme right as you seem to want it - we have developed a long time since the Victorian era mate.
 
the problem i have is with the leeches of society, why should someone who doesnt work be given money? Why should my granddad, who started with nothing at the age of fifteen (just like my grandma) have had to pay 40% tax on some of his earnings in order to pay for someone elses dole money?

Why should the government receive a large part of the value of his house and possessions when he dies? My grandparents have worked fucking hard for this money, people who don't work do not have any entitlement to it.
People who don't work will get very little of this value, seeing as they can only claim benefits if they're actively seeking work. Contrary to the middle class view of the world, the majority of the unemployed CANNOT find work, as opposed to not wanting to work. People who don't even bother to look get their dole cut off.
And besides, he may have worked fucking hard for his money, but when he dies, he'll be DEAD. It's not like he can enjoy his money any longer, and allowing unrestricted inheritance means that the upper classes will continue to get richer, while the lower classes will continue to get poorer. Did your family earn your grandfather's money? No! So why do you deserve it just because you spawned from him?

I strongly believe that poor people should not be allowed to have kids. I was hated for it in our politics debates at school but on the other hand a number of people saw the plain sense in it.
Why should the amount of money you have have anything to do with basic human rights? Oh, that's right, you're rich enough for this not to affect you :rolleyes:.


EDIT: And on a lighter note; the latest googlebomb
 
Mark posted on Apr 11 2005 at 07:58 PM said:
johncross85 posted on Apr 11 2005 at 07:33 PM said:
What I really hate about Labour is that they seem to be turning me into a Tory. A fate worse than death...

Once upon a time I would have always gone for the Lib Dems but they have been so crouded in the middle of late that they are starting to come up with daft policies just to stand out. It used to be that Labour would come up with one stupid idea that would be diametrically oposed by the Torys with another stupid idea and the Lib Dems would come up with a fairly reasonable middle ground idea that didn't make good press but would make good policy. Now they feel compelled to come up with stand-out policies too and all three end up sounding like a bunch of fools.

Were it up to me, I'd add a 'None of these pricks!' option to the ballot papers. If 'None of these pricks!' was the most popular vote we would then shoot every MP in the head and get an entire new batch. At least we would be shut of the current shower who, regardless of who wins in May, we will be stuck with one way or the other for the next 20 years or so.

Some would say that's being harsh...

They'd be wrong.

J(ohn)

It's called abstaining ;)



True buuuuuuuttttttttt... We are supposed to all have the right to "vote and pay taxes". We sure as hell pay taxes but abstaining takes away the voting bit. I know that I could just invalidate the ballot by scribbling on it but it's not the same - we need a way of displaying out disgust properly. The Aussies have compulsory voting but they also have a "None of the above" option. What would happen if we had a "None of the above" option and the majority ticked that one?

What I am really getting at is that we currently have a choice of voting for the lesser of three evils. I want to vote for the party that I want in power. I don't want to have to vote for the party that I don't want in power the least.

J(ohn)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
markusdragon posted on Apr 12 2005 at 04:56 AM said:
the problem i have is with the leeches of society, why should someone who doesnt work be given money? Why should my granddad, who started with nothing at the age of fifteen (just like my grandma) have had to pay 40% tax on some of his earnings in order to pay for someone elses dole money?

Why should the government receive a large part of the value of his house and possessions when he dies? My grandparents have worked fucking hard for this money, people who don't work do not have any entitlement to it.
People who don't work will get very little of this value, seeing as they can only claim benefits if they're actively seeking work. Contrary to the middle class view of the world, the majority of the unemployed CANNOT find work, as opposed to not wanting to work. People who don't even bother to look get their dole cut off.
And besides, he may have worked fucking hard for his money, but when he dies, he'll be DEAD. It's not like he can enjoy his money any longer, and allowing unrestricted inheritance means that the upper classes will continue to get richer, while the lower classes will continue to get poorer. Did your family earn your grandfather's money? No! So why do you deserve it just because you spawned from him?

I have applied to over 40 jobs in the last two weeks, amount of interviews == 1.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
finty said:
If I had a vote I wouldn't vote, purely because NI politicans are cocks.
I'll be putting something similar ... They're all fucking media whores who polarize opinion so that the middle ground is no choice.
I loathe career politicians. They are not in politics to benefit the country. They are not driven by any beliefs about the good of society.
They make me sick
icon8.gif



johncross said:
Were it up to me, I'd add a 'None of these pricks!' option to the ballot papers. If 'None of these pricks!' was the most popular vote we would then shoot every MP in the head and get an entire new batch. At least we would be shut of the current shower who, regardless of who wins in May, we will be stuck with one way or the other for the next 20 years or so.
It's called 'spoiling your ballot' and is a vote against the system ;)
If my one vote really counted I'd use it for what I beleive, but at the moment I believe that none of them are worth voting for. If 'Jedi' can be added to the last Census (link here) I'm sure that there can be a 'none of these pricks' option added to ballot papers :>


the problem i have is with the leeches of society, why should someone who doesnt work be given money? Why should my granddad, who started with nothing at the age of fifteen (just like my grandma) have had to pay 40% tax on some of his earnings in order to pay for someone elses dole money?
It's called being a compassionate human being <_<
 

Attachments

  • icon8.gif
    icon8.gif
    677 bytes · Views: 171
Last edited by a moderator:
gp32rich posted on Apr 12 2005 at 10:19 AM said:
finty said:
If I had a vote I wouldn't vote, purely because NI politicans are cocks.
I'll be putting something similar ... They're all fucking media whores who polarize opinion so that the middle ground is no choice.
I loathe career politicians. They are not in politics to benefit the country. They are not driven by any beliefs about the good of society.
They make me sick
icon8.gif



johncross said:
Were it up to me, I'd add a 'None of these pricks!' option to the ballot papers. If 'None of these pricks!' was the most popular vote we would then shoot every MP in the head and get an entire new batch. At least we would be shut of the current shower who, regardless of who wins in May, we will be stuck with one way or the other for the next 20 years or so.
It's called 'spoiling your ballot' and is a vote against the system ;)
If my one vote really counted I'd use it for what I beleive, but at the moment I believe that none of them are worth voting for. If 'Jedi' can be added to the last Census (link here) I'm sure that there can be a 'none of these pricks' option added to ballot papers :>


the problem i have is with the leeches of society, why should someone who doesnt work be given money? Why should my granddad, who started with nothing at the age of fifteen (just like my grandma) have had to pay 40% tax on some of his earnings in order to pay for someone elses dole money?
It's called being a compassionate human being <_<

40% tax is a fucker though, i turned down a promotion at work becuase of this.

boss: well done youve got a promotion youve a pay rasie of £9000, obviously there will be more work and stress envolved

me "i already earn more money than i need, why would i need more stress for an extra £100 a week, no thank you"
 

Attachments

  • icon8.gif
    icon8.gif
    677 bytes · Views: 172
Last edited by a moderator:
moz posted on Apr 12 2005 at 12:09 PM said:
gp32rich posted on Apr 12 2005 at 10:19 AM said:
finty said:
If I had a vote I wouldn't vote, purely because NI politicans are cocks.
I'll be putting something similar ... They're all fucking media whores who polarize opinion so that the middle ground is no choice.
I loathe career politicians. They are not in politics to benefit the country. They are not driven by any beliefs about the good of society.
They make me sick
icon8.gif



johncross said:
Were it up to me, I'd add a 'None of these pricks!' option to the ballot papers. If 'None of these pricks!' was the most popular vote we would then shoot every MP in the head and get an entire new batch. At least we would be shut of the current shower who, regardless of who wins in May, we will be stuck with one way or the other for the next 20 years or so.
It's called 'spoiling your ballot' and is a vote against the system ;)
If my one vote really counted I'd use it for what I beleive, but at the moment I believe that none of them are worth voting for. If 'Jedi' can be added to the last Census (link here) I'm sure that there can be a 'none of these pricks' option added to ballot papers :>


the problem i have is with the leeches of society, why should someone who doesnt work be given money? Why should my granddad, who started with nothing at the age of fifteen (just like my grandma) have had to pay 40% tax on some of his earnings in order to pay for someone elses dole money?
It's called being a compassionate human being <_<

40% tax is a fucker though, i turned down a promotion at work becuase of this.

boss: well done youve got a promotion youve a pay rasie of £9000, obviously there will be more work and stress envolved

me "i already earn more money than i need, why would i need more stress for an extra £100 a week, no thank you"

lucky you.

40% is low. In 1979, the top rate of income tax was 83%!
 

Attachments

  • icon8.gif
    icon8.gif
    677 bytes · Views: 161
Last edited by a moderator:
Yup, even 50% tax is much lower than the rate Thatcher imposed. My family have struggled for many years, and now thanks to my parent's hard work we can afford things like holidays. We barely used to have enough money to eat.

However, my mum and dad are staunch Labour supporters, simply because they don't mind sharing what they have. And I won't either.
 
w00t, finally a little compassion from someone

I find most people voting conservative are being selfish

I am also very opposed to strict immigrant laws

the people who illegally migrate to england are nto always doing so out of pleasure, they have real problems, and who gives a shit if i loose a bit of money and space to help some guy who can't afford to eat

I am pefectly happy with paying taxes when i am older, the only problem i have is the way labour spend tax money, which leads me to the Lib Dems, the happy mediium that is neither here nor there
 
I have no problems with 75% of Labour policies, but as with Rico we where lied to about Iraq - If they had of told us the truth then maybe they would be getting mine and countless other peoples votes. Also I cant stand the Tories, they are antiquated and belong in the past - This then leaves me with the Lib Dems or the Greens, and the Greens are pretty crap on everything other than enviromental issues.
 
spray posted on Apr 11 2005 at 11:44 PM said:
why is this insanity? if people without jobs have no children to support then less money is needed by social security. if these people have no children then there are less people growing up already in poverty. it just baffles me that people already on welfare can logically be allowed to have/have more kids.
scrap welfare benefits and don't ban the poor from having children problem solved
 
Last edited by a moderator:
johncross85 posted on Apr 12 2005 at 09:25 AM said:
I don't want to have to vote for the party that I don't want in power the least.

J(ohn)

proportional representation dude

And as for the immigration issue, it smacks as an way of smokescreening their economic policies by playing on peoples media induced xenephobia (sp?). But maybe thats just me being cynical.


And as for welfare, I'd rather cast the net wide and catch everyone whoc actually needs it and a fair few leeches as well rather than let just one person that does need it go without
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LHC posted on Apr 12 2005 at 03:51 PM said:
spray posted on Apr 11 2005 at 11:44 PM said:
why is this insanity? if people without jobs have no children to support then less money is needed by social security. if these people have no children then there are less people growing up already in poverty. it just baffles me that people already on welfare can logically be allowed to have/have more kids.
scrap welfare benefits and don't ban the poor from having children problem solved
yawn


Edit- toned down to avoid a flame fest!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top