What you've got to remember is that to get the rich to work harder, you need to give them more...Classic Right-wing ideology right there.
OTOH to ignore the idea that increasing the highest tax rate can result in decreased tax receipts is classic left-wing ideology. Note that as with most of the stuff on this thread I'm sitting on the fence and not commenting on whether it's true - however your position seems to be to ignore it or dismiss it as unimportant without proving that it isn't true.
Seriously.... how many times have we heard him make vague noises about this? Loads of times! Its been going on since they got in! And what has he actually done about it?
I'll refrain from doing "clever" editing and simply point out that they all make noises about closing tax loopholes and about efficiency savings without ever seemingly doing anything. It seems to be one of the standard easy ways to make unfunded spending promises. The trouble is it seems the people who pull the strings benefit from tax loopholes - surely otherwise it wouldn't be all that difficult to vastly simplify the tax system.
I object to my parents complaining that their pensions are only going up at twice the rate of my earnings. When my dad alone gets more in pension then I get at work. While they moan at the possible loss of their winter heating allowance and free bus passes which they apparently "earned" while working, even though tbey didn't exist when tbey were working.
I object to them being able to joke about sticking £100 a month in their grandchildrens savings accounts despite their meagre pension increases.
Actually, I don't really object to any of it. For the middle one of 9 kids of a merchant seaman, who's brothers went down pits or into shipyards, my dad worked incredibly hard to get what he has achieved, through crises as big or bigger than this one.
But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
Anyone who votes Tory who isn't wealthy is just an oxygen thief.
Why thank you, and the same to you.
and has a bike habit to maintain ..... 😀But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
The one thing that does need changing is a simplified tax system. It's not an easy decision as it would put people out of work, but it needs to be done regardless.
But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
Really when food and clothes prices have fallen.
[quote=grum ]The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
and the Labour party is incompetence dressed up as social responsibility?
hard place and a rock I think.
Where's screaming lord sutch when you need him.
They are all zombie maggots.
No exception.
🙄
edit: you are merely voting for the zombie maggots that cause less damages ...
grum - Member
The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
Do they even bother to dress it up as some kind of ideology any more? I think this lot are quite proud of the absence of any ideology, further than their own desperate snouts-in-the-trough grasping, and heartless no-such-thing-as-society cruelty.
5 pages until we got to "no such thing as society"
Well done chaps.
[i]grum - Member
The Tory party [s]is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.[/s] I don't understand and don't want to understand.
[/i]
Prejudice from the left, oh the ironing.
Where's screaming lord sutch when you need him.
He changed his name to Farage
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work. You can't pay for the NHS and the welfare state if the economy is bust.
By the way the £3bn savings where to cost an average of £300 a family for those in work but on benefits. By my maths that means there are 10 million families on work related benefits, that doesn't seem right ?
jambalaya - MemberBy my maths that means there are 10 million families on work related benefits, that doesn't seem right ?
I'm not surprised if that is correct ...
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Just sayin'.
Prejudice from the left, oh the ironing.
Sorry yes, you want to starve the poor to help them - I was forgetting.
and now it turns out Victoria Pendleton is [i]one of them[/i]
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Nothing wrong with that. The problem is when they assume that everyone on benefits is a workshy scrounger and needs teaching a lesson.
[i]Sorry yes, you want to starve the poor to help them - I was forgetting. [/i]
Pathetic comments such as this just write you out of the conversation.
shut the door on your way out, there's a good lad.
[i]The problem is when they assume that everyone on benefits is a workshy scrounger and needs teaching a lesson. [/i]
I guess it just comes naturally to you. Oh, to be gifted like a Trolgrips is [i]gifted[/i]. Your indescriminate insult is very crude. Why can't you try to imagine that you're not the only person here with a brain. In fact, don't imagine it.
So we should make balanced, sensible comments like this eh Solo?
the left, who are too busy crying about the rich and calling for Labour to rob the rich and duff-up the companies
Shut the door on your way out, there's a good lad.
Grum.
I'm honoured that you have chosen to immitate my post. Probably the best you could do after your previous posts. Which kinda illustrates my point.
Thank you.
😀
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Seeing as we're indulging in defining party ideologies in one liners. I'd say that the tory ideology is that everyone is on their own and can only help themselves and shouldn't expect any help from anyone else. The old labour ideology is pretty much the opposite: By cooperating, working together and pooling resources, everyone can be better off. The new labour ideology? Gain power by any means necessary.
Is it laughable that this thread suffers from various [s]misconceptions[/s] delusions?
That labour is left wing. That Tories encourage work. That the Tor-Lib-Lab-UKI parties have a coherent ideology
That the gov't actually has any influence over a global economy (they just take credit on the up cycle and take a kicking on the downcycle)
That professional MP's (as opposed to MP's who have actually had a profession) are competent to run the country.
I'd say that the tory ideology is that everyone is on their own and can only help themselves and shouldn't expect any help from anyone else.
Hmm:
[i] It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations, because there is no such thing as an entitlement unless someone has first met an obligation and it is, I think, one of the tragedies in which many of the benefits we give, which were meant to reassure people that if they were sick or ill there was a safety net and there was help, that many of the benefits which were meant to help people who were unfortunate—“It is all right, we joined together and we have these insurance schemes to look after it”.
That was the objective, but somehow there are some people who have been manipulating the system and so some of those help and benefits that were meant to say to people: “All right, if you cannot get a job, you shall have a basic standard of living!” but when people come and say: “But what is the point of working? I can get as much on the dole!” You say: “Look” It is not from the dole. It is your neighbour who is supplying it and if you can earn your own living then really you have a duty to do it and you will feel very much better!”[/i]
Bit pointless arguing over who caused what.
ffs
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work. You can't pay for the NHS and the welfare state if the economy is bust.
Actually NHS and the welfare state were created precisely at a time when the UK economy was as bust as it's ever been. Learn your history jambalaya.
And the Tories far from encouraging and rewarding work have an uncanny knack of pushing unemployment far higher than Labour, and have a distinct preference for low wages.
Going by the graph guess when the Tories not Labour were in power :
[img] 
[/img]
Pushing unemployment up and wages down does not equate with encouraging and rewarding work.
Yes, I can see clearly from that graph that Labour were in power 1987-90 and 1993-2006
But this government is doing better [img] 
[/img]
[i]Actually NHS and the welfare state were created precisely at a time when the UK economy was as bust as it's ever been. Learn your history jambalaya[/i]
You could try learning a bit of history, yourself. The welfare state, when it was set-up, wasn't the huge organization it is today and didn't cost anywhere near as much!
[i]Yes, I can see clearly from that graph that Labour were in power 1987-90 and 1993-2006[/i]
😆
Graphs, gotta like'm
The politics of envy are so ugly. The Tories and Labour are equally spaced in my opinion hardly a gnats chuff between them. The recent debacle in the money markets showed quite clearly that, in matters of the economy at least, politicians are on the periphery.
It's also true that without growth in the economy our business model fails, we have adopted a way of life that is basically keep running faster or fail and none of the mainstream parties have a way out. It's simplistic to hold up political idealologies as the defining factors in our society, market forces are what really drive the UK. Increasingly people who can't compete get left behind and that's that. Labour or Tory it's doesn't change. Every other growth econnomy are educating their way out of this situation but we're doing the opposite and I'm sure that happened under labour.
I can see clearly from that graph that Labour were in power 1987-90
No two million unemployment suggests the Tories were in power. And of course they were, despite having castigating Labour in 1979 for being responsible for 1.5 million unemployed.
The main Tory election poster in the 1979 general election :
[img] 
[/img]
Breathtaking hypocrisy eh ?
@ernie, as @solo says its not a matter of when the NHS was setup but how we can afford it today. You certainly can't afford it if the economy is bust and the deficit is spiraling out of control.
I love the generalisations on here, like the Tories think everyone on benefits is workshy. Of course they don't think that. Are some on benefits workshy, undoubtably.
@ernie the Labour party of the late 1970's shot itself in both feet with both barrels, more than once. I remember the time well as it was the first election I voted in. I also remember well why UB40 was so named and he rock against Thatcher tours.
Loss without limit Ernie... Loss without limit!
Maybe when they got into power, the Tories realised that things were actually a lot worse than they had bneen told they were? A bit like the 'there is no money' note in 2010?
It's simplistic to hold up political idealologies as the defining factors in our society, market forces are what really drive the UK. Increasingly people who can't compete get left behind and that's that. Labour or Tory it's doesn't change. Every other growth econnomy are educating their way out of this situation but we're doing the opposite and I'm sure that happened under labour.
I'm not going to defend the labour party but last time I looked I didn't see a particularly huge effort on behalf of the tories to improve primary and secondary education and increase higher education attendance. And the idea that there is no solution to rampant market forces is silly. There are plenty of examples of how an activist state can counter a lot of the negative impacts of the market and lots of research that says it's imperative for the success of the market to have an active state redressing the balance.
But this government is doing better
Nice graph mefty, it shows that despite the worse global recession since the 1930s unemployment never went up above 8% under Labour, which substantially less than unemployment was in 1984 when the Tories were in power and there was no global recession comparable to the 1930s.
Now I'm not a fan of New Labour but I'm sure you'll agree with me when I say that's fairly impressive.
I say that's fairly impressive.
What was it costing?
I mean, the tories could end unemployment tomorrow if we were still running a £167 billion a year deficit...
I agree Daz there are ways to do so however none of our representatives are even having that conversation. I may have been unclear I don't believe there are no solutions just none being implemented!
The politics of envy are so ugly.
'The politics of envy' is usually a cheap shot used by Tories because they can't understand that not everyone is as selfish as they are.
I'm not envious of anyone - I earn bugger all by the standards of most on here but I still have plenty.
Unemployment graphs are increasingly meaningless these days with the growth of underemployment etc. You measure jobs by FTE not by people, you don't create more work with 2 part time positions than with one fulltimer. So add 1.4 million (according to the bank of england) underemployed to the problem- equivalent to an extra half million people out of work.
You also need to look at value added, when looking at employment- if the number of jobs goes up but pay falls, as has happened recently, that still reduces consumer spending etc- it's a success in some ways but not in all.
@ernie, as @solo says its not a matter of when the NHS was setup but how we can afford it today. You certainly can't afford it if the economy is bust and the deficit is spiraling out of control.
You said that "you can't pay for the NHS and the welfare state if the economy is bust". In 1945 when the NHS and welfare state were created Britain was broke.
[i]In 1945 when the NHS and welfare state were created Britain was broke. [/i]
Irrelevant, it's about now, not then.
[i]Unemployment graphs are increasingly meaningless these days with the growth of underemployment etc. You measure jobs by FTE not by people, you don't create more jobs with 2 part time positions than with one fulltimer. So add 1.4 million (according to the bank of england) underemployed to the problem- equivalent to an extra half million people out of work. [/i]
Aye, under employment, unemployment. It's a dreadful issue. Still, it would have been much worse had we not had such great border controls and a system that controlled economic migration...
Oh, hang on....
Irrelevant, it's about now, not then.
It is completely relevant. jambalaya claimed that you can't pay for the NHS and the welfare state if the economy is bust. The fact that the NHS and the welfare state were created at a time when Britain was bust proves that to be nonsense.
It's all about priorities.
No Tory claims "you can't pay for Trident replacement if the economy is bust". Why do you think that is ?
The sooner we get over this petty 'country' and 'border' nonsense, the better IMO.
