The Next General Election.

[walibe]

It WAS the tories that ripped the entire funding structure out of UK univesitities.

Actually read this thread, we are discussing the fees which were introduced by the Labour Government. The funding structure is open to debate and clearly your not one who can talk very clearly about it.

If you wish to, why not actually construct an argument with some facts or atleast points.

are a defunct party voted for by a defunct part of the country.

You mean the vast majority in our political history? LMAO.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by walibe
Actually read this thread, we are discussing the fees which were introduced by the Labour Government. The funding structure is open to debate and clearly your not one who can talk very clearly about it.

If you wish to, why not actually construct an argument with some facts or atleast points.



You mean the vast majority in our political history? LMAO.

Read "Captive State" by George Monbiot. It's 2AM here, but I will dig it out and get some quotes from it tomorrow...

Your last sentence doesn't make sense.

[walibe]

It does, if you were to total up all the votes the Torys have ever recieved they recieve the majority of the votes. Indeed the majority of the country would be prepared to vote Concervative again like through much of the 80s and early 90s and is the reason the Torys are doing so well in opinion polls.

Labours screwed up big time. Things simply havn't gotten better since the previous Tory government. Hospitals have failed to improve and education figures look to fall short. On top of this the levels of spin that the labour government has used thanks largely to Campbell is finally coming back at them.

Everyones started taking the fall for Tony, soon there will be nobody left. He is certainly towards the end of his term as leader of the labour party, he may get the next election but probably not a further one. Gordon Brown could be a suitable replacement but due to his wish to slash defence spending (which has prooved to be so vital in the last few years) there would be alot of opposition to him.

Politics are never boring, and it makes for an interesting guessing game, I'm sure we can all agree.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by walibe
It does, if you were to total up all the votes the Torys have ever recieved they recieve the majority of the votes. Indeed the majority of the country would be prepared to vote Concervative again like through much of the 80s and early 90s and is the reason the Torys are doing so well in opinion polls.

I am afraid you are wrong.

http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/e01/seats.htm

The Conservatives received 35.2% of the popular vote, whereas the Labour party received 41.4%.

The only party that can legitimately claim unfairness due to the FPTP system is the LibDems. Their ratio of seats to popular votes is far lower than the other two main parties.

Originally posted by walibe

Labours screwed up big time. Things simply havn't gotten better since the previous Tory government. Hospitals have failed to improve and education figures look to fall short. On top of this the levels of spin that the labour government has used thanks largely to Campbell is finally coming back at them.

Everyones started taking the fall for Tony, soon there will be nobody left. He is certainly towards the end of his term as leader of the labour party, he may get the next election but probably not a further one. Gordon Brown could be a suitable replacement but due to his wish to slash defence spending (which has prooved to be so vital in the last few years) there would be alot of opposition to him.

Politics are never boring, and it makes for an interesting guessing game, I'm sure we can all agree.

Defence spending has proved vital in recent years? LMFAO! What are you talking about? Who have we needed to defend ourselves against?

Normally I will not defend the labour party as I do not support them, but in this instance what you have said is wrong. The Labour Party have provided FAR more money to public services than the Tory party ever did. Whether this is going to have a significant effect is arguable, the amounts of money involved, however, is not.

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by walibe

Also well done for putting up a decent argument. It pisses me off to see statements like:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typical Tory crap!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



And don't worry, I'm not making you out to be a Labour supporter .

PJ

But it's always the Tory supporters that spout rubbish that they have seen in the Torygraph, like this:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by walibe
I am a tory boy but I must say this poll is not truely reflective of the general population (popularity ratings) which puts Concervatives in the lead, followed by Labour then very closely by Lib Dems.

I think people are getting fed up of Labour now, its worst than the previous tory government at times. Alot of people are looking back to the tories once again although I am somewhat skeptic as to if people will actually put their cross in the Tory box on the night. Don't write off the Lib Dems either, given another few parliments they could become the second major party but to be frank have no chance of winning the next general election.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TBH if we really lived in a democracy we wouldn't have to vote for the least worst of a bunch of self-centered money grabbing power hungry fools. We wouldn't have to vote for these people who were born into that narrow-minded rich kiddie world, where they have no idea on how the rest of the country actually works. I would vote for someone who had worked to get where they are now and have some real interest in running a country, not taking millions of people for a ride and on they way extorting as much money as they can for their 'back pocket fund' (as I like to call it!)

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
TBH if we really lived in a democracy we wouldn't have to vote for the least worst of a bunch of self-centered money grabbing power hungry fools. We wouldn't have to vote for these people who were born into that narrow-minded rich kiddie world, where they have no idea on how the rest of the country actually works. I would vote for someone who had worked to get where they are now and have some real interest in running a country, not taking millions of people for a ride and on they way extorting as much money as they can for their 'back pocket fund' (as I like to call it!)

I find your attitude towards MP's quite interesting. Although I would agree that *a few* MPs are self obssessed rich kids who are out of touch, I think that the large majority if MPs try to do what they feel is right for the country.

The notion that they are all stupendously rich is also something of a misnoma I think. They might get a decent salary, but it's not out of orbit, and they do work for it.

I am talking for all party MPs now, not just the party I would vote for...

[walibe]

The notion that they are all stupendously rich is also something of a misnoma I think. They might get a decent salary, but it's not out of orbit, and they do work for it.

I'd agree, there are a few rather rich MPs but the majority are not that. The majority of the truley rich people are in the house of lords.

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by DaBeeeenster
I find your attitude towards MP's quite interesting. Although I would agree that *a few* MPs are self obssessed rich kids who are out of touch, I think that the large majority if MPs try to do what they feel is right for the country.

The notion that they are all stupendously rich is also something of a misnoma I think. They might get a decent salary, but it's not out of orbit, and they do work for it.

I am talking for all party MPs now, not just the party I would vote for...

OK, maybe it was a little too generalising, but it seems all too often there is an enormous amount of piddling about and cooking the books for everything to be above board......

Also, I suppose you're right, they aren't stupendously rich (not all of them) but when you set your own salary you can pay yourself hansomly. But you never hear about a poor politician do you? And you never see them parading around outside Whitehall with banners shouting 'fair pay for politicians', do you?

[walibe]

'fair pay for politicians', do you?

I believe the MPs refused a pay rise on more than one occasion in the past couple of years. When you consider the length of days these people work on most occasions, they are well worth the money.

PJ

[Big RICHARD]

Originally posted by walibe
I believe the MPs refused a pay rise on more than one occasion in the past couple of years. When you consider the length of days these people work on most occasions, they are well worth the money.

PJ

Do you believe that politicians are in the job for the love of their country and the rewarding feeling they get that they are doing good for everyone in that country. Or do you think they're their for the money?

Also, do you have a link about MPs refusing pay rises?

[walibe]

Do you believe that politicians are in the job for the love of their country and the rewarding feeling they get that they are doing good for everyone in that country. Or do you think they're their for the money?

I don't have the link, its happened on several occasions. They must be doing it for the country as the people who are in government usually get rid of their business interests before reaching the cabinet which leaves them with a lower income. Many people could make far more money staying in their regular jobs than becoming MPs.

[Big RICHARD]

How much do MPs get? Obviously back benchers will get less than the PM and other party leader type MPs.

[walibe]

An MPs parliamentary salary is £56,358 for the financial year beginning 1st April 2003.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
Do you believe that politicians are in the job for the love of their country and the rewarding feeling they get that they are doing good for everyone in that country. Or do you think they're their for the money?

Also, do you have a link about MPs refusing pay rises?

Unquestionably they are in it for being an MP, not for the money. Pretty much every MP could go into industry and command several times their MP salary.

MP's have voted to keep their pay unchanged many times. Just google it.

[DaBeeeenster]

Originally posted by Big RICHARD
How much do MPs get? Obviously back benchers will get less than the PM and other party leader type MPs.

Google does exist you know mate!

[Saracen]

As this thread had drifted way off-topic, I have split the off-topic material (on defence spending and it's effect on terrorism) into a new thread of it's own - Saracen