O/T something missing on here?

[P/T Indie]

You would end up with more coallation governments on those figures labour would go with snp so tories would have to go with UKIP Meaning UKIP would get a big say on Govt. Also a lot more chance it wouldn't work and the govt would break up. A bit OTT but that's how Hitler got in through coallations.

[shrimpnsave]

You would end up with more coallation governments on those figures labour would go with snp so tories would have to go with UKIP Meaning UKIP would get a big say on Govt. Also a lot more chance it wouldn't work and the govt would break up. A bit OTT but that's how Hitler got in through coallations.

Am I right in thinking that you regard Farage as a present day "Hitler"

[P/T Indie]

No not at all that wasn't aimed at UKIP My post was two parts one saying the SNP and UKIP would suddenly get a big say. THE second part just saying PR can be dangerous If you look back over history.

[black morse]

No not at all that wasn't aimed at UKIP My post was two parts one saying the SNP and UKIP would suddenly get a big say. THE second part just saying PR can be dangerous If you look back over history.

Agree entirely with this. Could end up with governments being virtually unable to do what they were elected for, more government defeats and more elections with changes of direction every year.

[SolentShrimp]

Can anybody tell me how many were claiming Disability Benefits when Liebour came to power in 1997?
And ditto when Liebour were binned in 2010?
Don't worry if you can't provide an answer, I realise it might be a bit embarrassing.

[SolentShrimp]

Labour created the Benefits culture, making scrounging a much better option than working.

Think if you do you're research you'll find it was the Tories who created Incapacity Benefit.

It replaced Invalidity Benefit which I believe was also introduced during a Tory reign.

The Tories like to make out they reduce unemployment but basically they like to reduce figures.

Last I heard there was more people not working full time but not counted in the unemployed figure as they were students, not claiming, etc than with the last Labour government.

There' a bit of a difference between who introduced the Benefit, and who made claiming Benefits an easy way of making a comfortable way of living for the rest of their lives.

[George Dawes]

Peter, they both tell lies.

Tories since they have been in power, week in week out have said don't blame us blame them, blaming everything on Labour with constant borrowing, and then it came about on them recent live TV debates and Sunday politics, they(Tories) have actually spent/borrowed more money than Labour since

[Freez]

..and yet some Tory silver spooner was on the news at teatime saying they will continue to cut the deficit, when they have actually borrowed more!!

All of them couldn't lie straight in bed.

[BoroRedShrimp]

Labour created the Benefits culture, making scrounging a much better option than working.

Think if you do you're research you'll find it was the Tories who created Incapacity Benefit.

It replaced Invalidity Benefit which I believe was also introduced during a Tory reign.

The Tories like to make out they reduce unemployment but basically they like to reduce figures.

Last I heard there was more people not working full time but not counted in the unemployed figure as they were students, not claiming, etc than with the last Labour government.

There' a bit of a difference between who introduced the Benefit, and who made claiming Benefits an easy way of making a comfortable way of living for the rest of their lives.

I am just pointing out what you said earlier regarding out-of-work benefits. The Tories aren't saints & it's about time you took off your blue-tinted spectacles & realised that the Tories caused food banks to be required by working families who aren't fortunate enough to have family assistance with childcare. What's your point about benefits to help the working on low incomes or out-of-work benefits? Make up your mind!

Labour introduced ESA to get people (scroungers) back to work in 2008. That is hardly encouraging scrounging to stay out of work.

However, I don't feel it is right that any vulnerable person who is disabled or on high amounts of anti-psychotic medication, which is stronger than illegal drugs, should be forced back to work because welfare is the scapegoat for the country's money problems, as the Tories do. The Tories shut Shaw Trust, many Remploy branches to help people back to work with the necessary skills, Tories seem to think they're not needed. They are and without the skills provided by the likes of Shaw Trust and Remploy people are unable to stay in work. Before you call everyone out-of-work a scrounger make sure you know they are fit for work without any assistance including affordable childcare.

[Heysham_Shrimp]

..and yet some Tory silver spooner was on the news at teatime saying they will continue to cut the deficit, when they have actually borrowed more!!

All of them couldn't lie straight in bed.

The deficit and borrowing are 2 different things though.

The deficit is the difference or shortfall of the amount the Government receives in Taxes and Revenues etc and the amount the Government pays out in expenditure.

Borrowing is how the Government makes up the shortfall between its income and expenditure and given the huge deficit that was built up which was already a structural deficit , borrowing was certain to increase just to balance the books.

[SolentShrimp]

Excellent posting H_S.

Until the Tories got into power in 2010, they could only guess at the financial mess, and long term financial commitments they were about to inherit. And as we know it was a lot worse than any guesstimates, and has to be paid for by ALL of us.

And any reasonable person should know that Labour would do exactly the same again! Fortunately it won't be any time soon.

[Wild Bill]

The coalition could and should have cleared the deficit during the last parliament, as they clearly promised; if they had not chocked off the recovery (yes GDP was growing when they took over in 2010) and offered a blended plan of necessary cuts along with tax rises.

With the vicious cuts the economy dipped back in to recession and then flat lined for years. There was a cost of living crisis for most of the parliament, but fortunately for them this eased during the last 12 months or so, right in time for the election.

If the Coalition was serious about about cutting the deficit and looking after working people, why on earth did they give a whopping 5% tax breaks to the wealthiest? To make this acceptable to the masses they offered piecemeal cuts to those on low incomes by raising the personal allowance.

Common sense tells us deficit needs to be cleared, but its its blatantly being used as a smokescreen by the Tories to implement their ideological cuts to the public sector and change the voting attitudes of the population. Sadly it appears to be working quite well right now.

[Christies Child]

Considering the battering that nearly every interviewer on the BBC gave the PM and his Tory party, he's done bloody well to confound his critics.

No tears in this household over the result.

And 'that women' should take a course in Maths......

[Phil Anderer]

The coalition could and should have cleared the deficit during the last parliament, as they clearly promised; if they had not chocked off the recovery (yes GDP was growing when they took over in 2010) and offered a blended plan of necessary cuts along with tax rises.

With the vicious cuts the economy dipped back in to recession and then flat lined for years. There was a cost of living crisis for most of the parliament, but fortunately for them this eased during the last 12 months or so, right in time for the election.

If the Coalition was serious about about cutting the deficit and looking after working people, why on earth did they give a whopping 5% tax breaks to the wealthiest? To make this acceptable to the masses they offered piecemeal cuts to those on low incomes by raising the personal allowance.

Common sense tells us deficit needs to be cleared, but its its blatantly being used as a smokescreen by the Tories to implement their ideological cuts to the public sector and change the voting attitudes of the population. Sadly it appears to be working quite well right now.

Actually Bill, although I know for many, myself included, it might have felt like we went back into recession, technically we didn't. Once all the figures had been revised, revised, and revised again, we never had 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth, which is the technical description of a recession. Sorry to be a pedant.

While I'm on, a word about zero hours contracts. They are not all bad! If you want to ignore the recently published survey which showed that, by a slim margin of 1%, more people on zero hours contracts are happy with their jobs than those on fixed hours contracts, then I'll give you a personal example. Having taken redundancy 2.5 years ago, Mrs A signed up to (at the last count, I think) 6 zero hours contracts. Because they are not exclusive, and don't preclude her taking on other contracts, she can accept or turn down work as she sees fit. She may not make anything like the money she was doing, but the work/life balance is massively improved. We were frankly horrified at the prospect of Miliband outlawing zero hours contracts, as it would have left her struggling to get the work she needs.

The point I'm trying to make is, it's all very well having populist policies and slogans (which ALL parties are guilty of), but sometimes a little more research will give you a more educated point from which to judge.

[Freez]

Thanks I'm fully aware of the difference between deficit and for borrowing, the two are different but inextricably linked.
My point was the Conservatives have persistently criticized previous Governments for borrowing too much, then hypocrisy was rife and they did the same. Necessity? Quite possibly. Then don't use it to attack the other side!

And as for the need try and stimulate the economy in what was, after all, a worldwide downturn, hardly any presiding government can be blamed, red, blue, or bright bloody pink!!

But thanks for patronizing us fence sitters with your right wing dogma!

[jon MFC fan]

As a Full Time University Student I have a Disability in fact two to be precise during my mid teens my mental state worsened as having a negative impact as i got stuck in rut due to bottling everything up but i'm trying to improve myself and i have achieved managing to go to university which was one of my aims.
i do get financial help due to my disability but its ones who have an addiction and reliance on substances About zero hour contracts the it can be good but when you're a student you get asked to work at anytime but ie if a night club it does not help with assignments.

the only problem is how the corporations such as Vodafone and Starbucks owe the govt more than two billion pounds

[SolentShrimp]

Thanks I'm fully aware of the difference between deficit and for borrowing, the two are different but inextricably linked.
My point was the Conservatives have persistently criticized previous Governments for borrowing too much, then hypocrisy was rife and they did the same. Necessity? Quite possibly. Then don't use it to attack the other side!

The "There's no money left" note that Liebour left behind for the Tories never gave any clues as to the horrendous extent of the financial mire.

So, with the best will in the world, how were the Tories to know the extent of the enduring Liebour financial stitch-up? Did Labour give the people they'd been governing for the previous 13 years any clues? Nope, they'd have happily carried on taking the country down the slippery slope. How very thoughtful and considerate of them.

I'm sure that if Cameron had known the truth, he'd have been a bit more guarded about what he promised.

And the fact is that Miliband lost this Election by a country mile, and Liebour don't know what to do next.

Len McCluskey's being a bit quiet too! And if the Unions do 'buy' the new Liebour Leader, then with luck the next General Election will go the same way. By which time, the country will be in a far better state, and only those that fully deserve will be claiming and receiving welfare benefits.

[KenH]

My point was the Conservatives have persistently criticized previous Governments for borrowing too much, then hypocrisy was rife and they did the same. Necessity? Quite possibly. Then don't use it to attack the other side!

I think the key is "necessity". The coalition had to keep borrowing because cutting too fast and too hard would have crippled the country that had become reliant on debt. However, Labour and Brown actively over-borrowed during the so-called "boom" years when there should have been no need to have any deficit at all. If we had been in a boom as triumphed by Brown, we should have been paying back debt not getting in deeper. Labour blame the 2010 recession and the bankers bailouts etc for the deficit, but they had a rising deficit long before then, i.e. adding to their borrowings year after year, despite the UK allegedly being in a period of boom - if that was the case, the borrowing levels should have been coming down. "no more boom & bust" - what a plonker!

[Freez]

According to our learned friends above we are not and have not been in a recession recently, yet still borrowing increases and will continue?? Necessity again, I hear the cry!! Its defendable or not?
Personally I feel anyone will and can justify it by whichever side of the fence they sit, from the politico's themselves down to the working man on here.

Interesting debate though!!

[Wild Bill]

We were frankly horrified at the prospect of Miliband outlawing zero hours contracts, as it would have left her struggling to get the work she needs.

Think the actual policy was that workers earned the right to guaranteed hours based on the average they have worked after 12-weeks in employment with the option to stay on zero hours if this suited their circumstances.

Like you say, you need to read up on the actual policies and not just see the banner headlines.

[Wild Bill]

Few charts to give some balance to the debate:

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Gua ... or-001.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10613201

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_na ... chart.html

Think its clear that both Labour and the Conservatives have had some successes and failures running the national economy over the last 25 years. Lets be honest, the financial crisis could have happened just as easily to the Tories as they believe in the free market and actually deregulated the market back in the 1980s. Labour's biggest mistake was leaving things how they were.

SoletShrimp seems to be basing the whole debate on what he has been fed from the shamefully biased Murdoch press. Do you really think the Tories didn't know the state of the economy until they received a tongue in cheek note from a departing political rival? Get a grip.

[SolentShrimp]

SoletShrimp seems to be basing the whole debate on what he has been fed from the shamefully biased Murdoch press. Do you really think the Tories didn't know the state of the economy until they received a tongue in cheek note from a departing political rival? Get a grip.

The reality is?
Yep, a long uphill struggle for Liebour.
So, get a grip yourself.

[George Dawes]

does anyone think Cameron will be true to his word, and give everyone in 2017 a fair IN/OUT vote on the EU?


others have promised us this before, and in return just lead us up the garden path.

[Heysham_Shrimp]

Few charts to give some balance to the debate:

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Gua ... or-001.jpg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10613201

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_na ... chart.html

Think its clear that both Labour and the Conservatives have had some successes and failures running the national economy over the last 25 years. Lets be honest, the financial crisis could have happened just as easily to the Tories as they believe in the free market and actually deregulated the market back in the 1980s. Labour's biggest mistake was leaving things how they were.

SoletShrimp seems to be basing the whole debate on what he has been fed from the shamefully biased Murdoch press. Do you really think the Tories didn't know the state of the economy until they received a tongue in cheek note from a departing political rival? Get a grip.

Forget the Murdoch Press , very few people cast their vote on the basis of what they say.

The fact is that the Labour Party economic strategy was , well in a word ........ Balls !

They spent the Bankers Bonus Tax about 27 different times. The much vaunted "Mansion Tax" was going to pay for 20,000 more nurses and 8,000 doctors !! In reality clever accountants would have reduced the Tax take on this to a very paltry amount. Their Tax policies were all based on "envy Taxes". They used to say that in America if someone saw a person with a Rolls Royce they would say "I want one too". In this country the Labour Party see someone with a Rolls Royce and they want to take it off him. (Unless he's a Labour Donor) !
Mind you Len McClusky was pulling all Miliband's strings for him , he wouldn't have known who his boss was once Alex Salmond asserted himself !
The Great British electorate saw through this and went for a long term economic plan that was working.
They saw Miliband pandering to the left and the reduction in Tuition Fees and the Spare Room Subsidy while completely ignoring the middle England voters and the people who have aspiration.
Miliband is just into student politics and people realised this.

Stop Press : Lord Alan Sugar has resigned from the Labour Party due to their economic policies.

[John L]

A day before the general election and no political thread? Have we all had enough already?

Yeah, thanks Bill...