anyone on here voting tory. why?

Pwned and beautifully so 😆

Glad you admit it Junky…

I kick ass, as usual

8)

back on topic… for at least one post…

I won’t be voting Tory as they have a 15% share of the vote where I live which is a Liberal/ Labour marginal seat.

tax evasion /avoidance are the same result–entities not paying their share -at even a low estimate of £70 Billion -then back date that , it runs into amounts that distort the economy to such an extent that every thing else is just meaning less, but the ruling order , have convinced many people that their woes lie at the door of the poor, sick , immigrants, people who have one more room than is deemed essential by people who live in mansions , often with wealth obtained by……..tax evasive companies they have relations with……its some trick , i’ll give them that….

I won’t be voting Tory as they have a 15% share of the vote where I live which is a Liberal/ Labour marginal seat.

You won’t be voting Tory because most other people near you won’t. Not sure I follow that.

Interesting no one responded to my earlier post.

In a very informal way it demonstrates that Tory voters are on the whole at the higher end of the social stratification ladder/power tree/’haves’ camp …

Whilst there are many non Tory voters in these social and economic status groups, my opinion is they have a more critical view of the world and society and can see what is going on around them – and crucially see what the tory party stands for.

Tory’s are all about exclusivity and subscribe wholly to the neo-liberalist agenda of individualisation…their slogan says it all..”hard working working families…” What if you cannot work? Born less able? Didnt get educated? Life opportunities not offered…?

Sorry, but my vote goes to a party that subscribes to inclusivity values, see humans as all the same and understands some people need more help because life can be shit and its not their fault. Not a party that puts responsibility down to the individual and blames everything on their life choices.. That is why the Tory party is still known as the nasty party…

A phrase used repeatedly by Gordon Brown during his time in Westminster.

Emerging from some British newspapers around 1995,[citation needed] Gordon Brown expressed gratitude to Bob Shrum for suggesting the phrase between 1994 and 1997

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardworking_families

Anyway, carry on.

Allthepies, I see you succumb to the logic of the system.

How come your response is to critise another party, instead of defending what I guess is your Tory vote…that kind of response is a very lame argument – same as the majority of politicians..

I’m not critising anyone, you’re the one doing that. I’m just pointing out that the phrase you feel so toxic is one which in not exclusively used by Tory governments.

Any system (communist, capitalist etc) is dependent on productivity. So what is wrong with appealing to, and incentivising those who enable us to have (and pay for) the NHS, social welfare etc?
You say “hard working” and “families” like they’re dirty words…….

The Tory use of “hardworking families” is different to Labours use..its all contrxtual, not just a phrase that exists in its own separate space/vacuum..

My point definitely stands still (to all in this thread)…I challenge people to defend their political stance by not simply saying “well so and so did this..”

It shouldn’t be about who ‘supposedly’ did best..imho it should be aboutnaspirational values etc…

Which is why the repeated use of statistics ti argue points is a waste of time. Statistics all depend on who writes/ccommisons them. There is no one definite version of reality so debating statistics I think is a waste of time..

😀
So tory hard working families are different to the hard working families referred to by labour?
It isn’t about context, it’s about votes. Neither are (or can afford to be) picky about who’s they get.
Anyways it’ll all be over soon, then whoevers party doesn’t succeed can whine and moan about how rubbish things are for the next few years 😀

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!!

Hi wrecker,

My point was that the phrase, in its context, excludes a huge group of people who cannot work..its not used in an inclusive way..a

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.

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

I am duty bound to provide for my dependents first of all

Molegrips nails why you can do this and also think of others

This is Britain and no one used to starve till the govt introduced sanctions and food bank use rose

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

I doubt that it will make much difference at all, but I do worry that tax will go up and they’ll create an oversize public sector too.
I’m not aligned with the tories in terms of philosophy, I’m anti-privatisation, and very much in favour of closing tax loopholes and would prefer it be done in a very robust manner. I also want to see more banking regulation (although neither have a great track record on this), however it could be a waste of time is the US don’t bother.
I don’t want to see the needy go without any more than anyone else does. People do need to be incentivised into work (where available) whether it’s by raising the minimum wage or putting JSA on a sliding scale, I don’t know.

Junkyard – lazarus
This is Britain and no one used to starve till the govt introduced sanctions and food bank use rose

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

If we would have been less helpful to the banking sector, we would be in much much more of a mess I’m afraid.

Don’t really feel reading the front page of The Sun makes you an expert.

If we had been less helpful to the banking sector, they would’ve been much less inclined to take risks they couldn’t afford.

I expect you’ll learn about it when you go to school.

Ah, a Richard Murphy report, the independent commentator funded by the TUC and Unison.

Yes, he’s been paid by the TUC to do research for them, I know this because he put his name to it, so hardly a shocking revelation.

How is he wrong, btw?

You won’t be voting Tory because most other people near you won’t. Not sure I follow that.

You’d be surprised, I”ve lost count of the number of people I’ve come across who vote according to who they think is going to win. Seems they just want to be on the winning team 😯

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

See my comments earlier about being honest about not giving a sh*t. As molly says, it will make very little difference to you, but a huge difference to those dependent on the state. Sorry to sound pious, but if you’re happy to swallow more homeless 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. Personally I’d rather live in a world where my kids don’t ask me questions like ‘why is that man sleeping on the pavement in the rain?’ or ‘why do some people not have enough to eat?’.

If we had been less helpful to the banking sector, they would’ve been much less inclined to take risks they couldn’t afford.

I expect you’ll learn about it when you go to school.

Perhaps you should consider who took their main constraints away in May 1997? That was the catalyst for the s**tstorm that followed.

I believe it may have been the same person who told us all “the age of boom & bust is gone” and proceeded to spend the budget surplus he had inherited plus every other penny he could get his hands on. I’m no Tory fan but someone, somewhere within Labour really needs to admit that they really did get it monumentally wrong instead of just pointing at the global recession.

All the time Ed ‘the note in the Treasury was just a joke ha ha’ Balls is likely to be let loose with the UK finances I can’t vote for them again – it actually feels like I’m being asked to vote for the ‘least bad’ rather than the ‘best’ option for the UK.

See my comments earlier about being honest about not giving a sh*t. As molly says, it will make very little difference to you, but a huge difference to those dependent on the state. Sorry to sound pious, but if you’re happy to swallow more homeless 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. Personally I’d rather live in a world where my kids don’t ask me questions like ‘why is that man sleeping on the pavement in the rain?’ or ‘why do some people not have enough to eat?’.

Viewing political parties solely in terms of the pennies in your pocket is a failure of imagination, even if we’re restricting the argument to purely selfish terms. I want to breathe cleaner air, have better cycling infrastructure, and better public services. That costs money.

I believe it may have been the same person who told us all “the age of boom & bust is gone” and proceeded to spend the budget surplus he had inherited plus every other penny he could get his hands on. I’m no Tory fan but someone, somewhere within Labour really needs to admit that they really did get it monumentally wrong instead of just pointing at the global recession.

This.

So many people have forgotten how much they destroyed the economy. You can’t just keep spending your way out of trouble. A return to labour would in fact make everyone worse off in the long term, especially the next generation who will be responsible for paying off our excesses.

Perhaps you should consider who took their main constraints away in May 1997? That was the catalyst for the s**tstorm that followed.

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

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?

Have you considered addressing what I said rather than defeating a point I never made?

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!!

I’m not going to flame you but I am going to say I don’t understand how people (and maybe you aren’t saying this) can say “I’m going to vote Tory because I can’t afford to vote for a party even though I believe would do right by broader society”. I can understand why people say “I don’t think Lab/Lib would actually do right by society”; I can understand people that say “I don’t care about broader society”; I can understand people that say “I’m rich and I don’t want to prop up broader society”. But I don’t see how someone can say they can’t afford to vote for someone that they actually believe would be better for society.

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.

100% this. My choice happens to be Conservative, but I’d honestly vote for him regardless of his party given the current candidates. He’s just – in my eyes – the best individual to represent our community.

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 f**king 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 f**king 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:

House of Commons champagne bill rises 72% since 2010

As for the unelected House of Lords, nomination to which has proven to be related to party donations:

Chin Chin…