[Closed] anyone on here voting tory. why?

So many people have forgotten how much they destroyed the economy.

Labour's light-touch regulation was enthusiastically supported by the tories, and George Osborne committed himself to Labour's spending plans.

Really was it all perfect? When was this time of utopia?

You'll have to explain why you think my comment was aimed at the conservative party.

I'm not sure I did - it was more my (mis)interpretation of being helpful to the banks. I still believe, knowing a couple of them, that taking their muzzle off in '97 was enough to start the snowball rolling and even they didn't expect it to keep going unabated for so long. They didn't need help, they just needed letting loose.

I'm not sure I did - it was more my (mis)interpretation of being helpful to the banks. I still believe, knowing a couple of them, that taking their muzzle off in '97 was enough to start the snowball rolling and even they didn't expect it to keep going unabated for so long. They didn't need help, they just needed letting loose.

Well sure, but given enthusiastic Tory support for deregulation and support for Labour spending from 2007, it's curious people are trying to draw a distinction between the two parties on the economy.

I am - and the simple reason is that they offer the best deal for me and my family.

In a perfect world, I'd love to take a broader view, but right now with a young family to provide for, the conservatives offer the best for me and seem most closely aligned to my views (not perfect fit by far, but nearer than anyone else).

I am duty bound to provide for my dependents first of all, so that's my reasoning. Flame away!!

For all those people who are claiming they're voting in the best interests of their family...what do you make of the extenisve research by Richard Wilkinson..as put in his popular book "the spirit level".. Do you subscribe to it or think its tosh?

So many people have forgotten how much they destroyed the economy.

If you repeat this often enough, will it change history?

One mo' time :
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-myth-excessive-government-borrowing-got-us-into-this-mess-8601390.html

Some labour policies I agree with some I dont

However, when it comes to Balls and Milliband I can not stand the pair of them

I feel that we would have failed as a country if these two ass clowns end up running the country.
It would be embarrassing.

But I dont think Labour are doing anything for the country especially.
Certainly no different to the Tories, when it comes to looking out for people.
Do you think the use of Foodbanks will stop under Labour.
Will the running of Hospitals change?
Will the benefits system be that different.
If you believe the spin then fine.
Whoever gets in it will be the same old same old.
So the decider is the people you choose to represent you.

So I am looking at my local candidates on what they represent.

Do you subscribe to it or think its tosh?

tosh

So I am looking at my local candidates on what they represent.

Will he though? Or will he vote how Dave tells him to?

If your constituents disagree on a particular vote, is he really likely to go against his party? Very few open votes in the commons, I think - which really buggers up the concept of representation.

so much like the wider polls, STW is happy to continually bicker about the lack of difference between the self serving capitalist scum in the Labour party and the socially responsible Conservative party.

knowing they are all a bunch of liars who will say one thing and then do what they want.

another five years gone, no change. sorry thats not entirely correct is it, now instead of indistinguishable single party politics, we have single party plus libdem coalition politics. woo and ****ing hoo.

many people fought, suffered, died to give us this choice. it makes me sad.

I may be wrong, molgrips. But that's the point. You vote based on what you feel, be that as a result of actually researching the candidates and their policies, because it's what your parents told you, or somewhere inbetween. I've researched the local candidates, and I've made my choice. He's a first time candidate so I have no idea whether or not he's going to be a "yes" man. He has done a lot of good things in this area and overseas. He appears to have some relevant life experience. The other options I have are either proven "yes" men, career politicians with a record of voting very much against the will of the community or deluded extreme right & left wingers. There's not much competition, if I'm honest. Others will most definitely disagree.

another five years gone, no change. sorry thats not entirely correct is it, now instead of indistinguishable single party politics, we have single party plus libdem coalition politics. woo and ****ing hoo.

You are right, but until the revolution comes, it's what we've got, and even though the differences between parties are miniscule, they have a massively disproportionate effect on those who find themselves reliant on the state. If as your post suggests you are concerned about those people, then the choice is pretty simple, even if it's unpalatable from an ideological point of view.

Here's one for the hard working families:

[url= http://www.stylist.co.uk/people/new-figures-reveal-huge-spike-in-house-of-commons-champagne-bill ]House of Commons champagne bill rises 72% since 2010[/url]

As for the unelected House of Lords, [url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/21/revealed-link-life-peerages-party-donations ]nomination to which has proven to be related to party donations[/url]:

[img] [/img]

Chin Chin...

I have no idea whether or not he's going to be a "yes" man

They are ALL yes men. How often do MPs defy the whip? It's rare.

So why make that point then?

meless people sleeping on the streets, people going hungry, the disabled and infirm stranded in their homes, persecution of the jobless etc for a few quid more a month in your pocket then fine.

Just lol at this.

I see your on this forum, so you have a smartphone/computer/tablet of some description. How can you use this device, knowing that there are others out there going without? How do you sleep at night?

I also want to see more banking regulation (although neither have a great track record on this)

Personally I would like to see consumer credit rules introduced like we have in other countries, eg compulsory to supply tax return/accounts to get a mortgage (ie no self cert), minimum deposit, sharing of credit card data with legal limits as to how much you can borrow. We already have much higher capital requirements which make banks much safer and we have the EU imposed bonus caps.

@konabunny, I think quite a lot of people vote based on personal economics/taxes, they have an opinion that they cannot afford to vote otherwise.

Its the lack of money coming in from the economic crash/downturn that has meant we cannot afford it. Govt spending did not cause the crash and govt spending was not in any way shape or form casual in the recession.
No govt ever saves for a rainy day tory or labour and labour has run more surpluses than the Tories and GO matched the spending pledges.

Unless you are a non dom

The rest of the EU can better afford their spending commitments as they raise a huge amount of money by having VAT on food. I refer to this point in response to comments about regressive tax regimes (inc general Tory bashing) when in fact we have one which is far more generous to the less well off than do our European cousins.

I see your on this forum, so you have a smartphone/computer/tablet of some description. How can you use this device, knowing that there are others out there going without? How do you sleep at night?

Ah yes the good old argument that unless you're a penniless hermit you have no right to be concerned about social justice and equality. So you're advocating a race to the bottom?

They are ALL yes men. How often do MPs defy the whip? It's rare.

Not in the last parliament it wasn't. (EDIT: [url= http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/14/tory-rebels-david-cameron_n_3271051.html ]See here[/url]) But I completely disagree with your view that an MP should represent the views of his constituency on every issue as if he is merely the deliverer of the result of rolling referenda, you vote for your MP based on his qualities to do the best for your constituency, it is up to him to work out how to do that. If you think someone else could do it better, you vote for them at the next election.

@wrecker, what more would you like to see, there has been a huge increase in banking regulation and capital requirements since the crash ? The banking levy has gone up 6 times ( I think) and the recent move from 0.15% to 0.20% represents a 30% increase in this tax and quite possibly will result in HSBC relocating it's HQ.

molgrips - Member

...

Do you really think your family will actually suffer under labour? I don't just mean a few quid a month on tax.

For me, it's not about the tax, the difference isn't great.

Where Labour really worry me is on Education.
They've a history of really screwing it up for the children (not talking about teachers here) and if you thought Gove was a meddling twonk, you've obviously forgotten how much worse it can be under a bureaucratic, authoritarian, left wing version.
That's where I'm concerned about family potentially suffering under Labour - or even worse - a Labour/Green alliance. The damage to childrens' education damages their whole future.
And no amount of tweaking of tax systems, benefits, or welfare can really compare significantly.

For balance, I have similar concerns over the Conservatives and the NHS.
IMO, another term could allow them to do irreversible damage to an institution which serves the country better than any other alternative ever could. it's taken 60 years to build and i worry they could easily destroy it within the next 5.

So all this talk of tax/welfare difference really doesn't matter to me - they're not that different.
For me, it's a choice between childrens education or national health service suffering.

edit - or neither

Major handed Labour a budget surplus

He didn't, but he did hand over a balanced budget so a surplus occurred a few years later as Brown broadly followed Tory spending plans in Labour's first term.

For balance, I have similar concerns over the Conservatives and the NHS.

Labour has been saying that the Tories will destroy the NHS since 1948, despite being in power for 40 of the intervening years, they have proved completely incompetent at this task.

JY Major handed Labour a budget surplus, they just turned it into a £90bn pa deficit

UK pays approx £48 billion a year in national debt interest payments

Without that debt, there would be no need for austerity...

This is probably about as close to the truth as all the toadying spin dreamed up by vast teams of PR agents and bullshit mongers that is being bandied around at the moment in the hope of suckering some mugs...

mefty - Member
Labour has been saying that the Tories will destroy the NHS since 1948, despite being in power for 40 of the intervening years, they have proved completely incompetent at this task.

Ok mefty.
You keep telling yourself that it's all about the extra penny in the pound in your pocket .

I see your on this forum, so you have a smartphone/computer/tablet of some description. How can you use this device, knowing that there are others out there going without? How do you sleep at night?

Ok mefty.
You keep telling yourself that it's all about the extra penny in the pound in your pocket .

A lazy stereotype, well done.

Did Darling just give up in the end? That rubber stamp must have taken a beating!

He didn't, but he did hand over a balanced budget so a surplus occurred a few years later as Brown broadly followed Tory spending plans in Labour's first term.

Is the much better answer

Given the accusations made towards the Tories, I am surprised they are not all in jail! Off the scale....

Where Labour really worry me is on Education.
They've a history of really screwing it up for the children

Really? Genuinely interested in when this happened?

Very funny newspaper endorsement from the younger generation for Labour - some cracking turns of phrase

[url= http://tab.co.uk/2015/05/06/ed-miliband/ ]The Tab[/url]

I love the end paragraph:

Vote for Labour if you want a foot in the door. Vote Conservative if you want the door gently closed in your face by a white-gloved porter.

It really doesn't matter who I vote for, the winner will be a Tory.

http://www.voterpower.org.uk/hertfordshire-north-east

They've a history of really screwing it up for the children (not talking about teachers here)

If this were the case, would you not expect education in Scotland to be significantly worse than in England considering Labour has been in power significantly more often than the Tories since WW2 there?

If this were the case, would you not expect education in Scotland to be significantly worse than in England considering Labour has been in power significantly more often than the Tories since WW2 there?

Eh? They haven't had devolved education for that long...

From the last page but this deserves a bit of challenge

If you are that poorly off the Tories won't help. If you are doing ok, then you would still do OK under labour, but the really poor people might also do better.

This or a variant of this is often quoted as a trueism on here but it's not, it's a just political view point.

The oposing view point is that growth is good for all and the best way to make the size of the welfare budget bigger is not to take a larger proportion of the overall pot but to make the pot bigger in the first place.

Just as a vote for the Tory's can be derided as a vote for greed and individualism a vote for Labour can be derided as a vote for jealousy and a lack of collective ambition.

"Why should I care if some people get really rich if me and my peers are a bit better off as well"

I know it's more nuanced than that but its also not as simple as "you vote tory, therefore you are a selfish arsehole"

The elephant in the room for both parties is productivity. Neither seem to be addressing that issue and that is really why we don't feel that well off, Labour or Tory, if they don't address the productivity issue then they are just fidling round the edges about how to dish out a pot that is growing slower than the amount that pot needs to fix.

Unless you are rich, own multiple properties or own a decent sized business, you are a moron for voting Tory and do not understand how the world works.

Oh and if you get your 'News' and information from mainstream newspapers you are also a moron.

HTH.

Unless you are rich, own multiple properties or own a decent sized business, you are a moron for voting Tory and do not understand how the world works.

Brilliant on all levels

The oposing view point is that growth is good for all and the best way to make the size of the welfare budget bigger is not to take a larger proportion of the overall pot but to make the pot bigger in the first place

Quite so but that is not an opposing viewpoint. Labour do not want to tax to the point that growth is stifled, despite many tories insisting that. Labour do want growth, but the difference is the manner of that growth. The Tory way is to reduce regulation to allow people to do as they see fit, but the problem is that whilst that can increase GDP nicely it ignores the fact that money begets money, privilege begets privilege and poverty begets poverty. That is the real problem I have with small government. If you let people sort it out for themselves then that results in less social mobility, or if you like less equal opportunity. And it's not malicious either. Hypothetically, if state schools are worse than private ones, the rich cannot be expected to send their kids to state schools and the poor cannot afford to pay - it's a logical conclusion of that situation - thus the poor kids are disadvantaged. The state then needs to spend more money on state schools to fix this issue, and it can only do that through tax of one sort or another.

I don't consider myself or a lot of people I know morons.

statements like that from Kudos are moronic.