Help - tempted to vote Tory, against my long held values! Convince me otherwise!

Nope, GoodnightElizabeth. Plenty of stats online re the respective economic records. Tory claims don't seem to add up - just because they say they're better doesn't mean they actually are.

The Conservatives say Labour is the party of boom and bust - well at least there is a boom with Labour because, as this government's shown, all you get with the Tories is the bust.

I think I just stepped into a parallel universe.

caroldecker:

Labour borrowed a total of £429.975 bn in their 13 years in power. So £200 bn in 6 years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 is reasonably in proportion to average yearly borrowing.

Up to 2013, the Coalition had borrowed £430.072 bn. In 3 years.

Kind of makes Brown's (proportional) £200 bn in 6 years pale into insignificance, doesn't it, especially when you consider the strong economic recovery in place before the Conservatives well, weren't actually elected? And even if most of Labour's remaining borrowing of £230 bn was 2008 and 2009, then, given the strong economy pre-2010 election, the money was obviously sensibly used. Unlike the Coalition's borrowing, given their weak economic track record and the current state of the economy ie weaker than when they took power.

But caroldecker, those smaller private tenancies often don't exist in a way (price, willingness of the lamdlords to accept HB) that would let over-occupiers move. There aren't squads of people saying screw you, I want an extra room to practice my yoga in and have auntie Mabel to stay. People are just stuck.

prettyseahorses The real killer was Brown borrowing over £200bn from 2002-2007 when it was not necessary.
When the current govt came into power in 2010, the annual borrowing was £162bn, which they have cut significantly
The 1999-2002 surplu was because the Labour government came into power in 1997 promising to follow conservative spending policies. When they followed thier own plan, they borrowed and spent excessively.

The bedroom tax could possibly be fair IF there were smaller properties to downsize into; IF it was applied in a more humane fashion (ie, exemptions for disabled people who have specific reasons for needing another room), and IF it also applied to pensioners, who are the largest group under occupying social housing by far.

But it's not; there's nowhere adequate for most of these people to move to, so it just causes unnecessary suffering to the poorest, some of whom are made homeless as a consequence and then have to be put up in temporary accommodation, which costs an absolute fortune. So, it's not saving any money, it's not getting people off the council waiting lists, and it's caused enormous amounts of misery to some of the most vulnerable in society.

Problem with Conservatives is that the economy goes to hell in a handbasket when they're in power, although they tell us otherwise.

For example, in 2010 debt was £0.76tr and 50% GDP, now it's rocketed to £1.3tr and 80% GDP. The economy was stronger in 2010 than it is now with rapid recovery from the global crash. Then the Tories came in and we went straight back into recession(s) and the recovery stalled as soon as their fiscal policies asserted themselves.

Another example, in the past 55 years there have been 7 years where the government has a surplus. Between 1979 and 1997, only 1989 showed a surplus. Between 1997 and 2010, there were 4 years, 1999-2002 inclusive, where there was a surplus.

The Conservatives say Labour is the party of boom and bust - well at least there is a boom with Labour because, as this government's shown, all you get with the Tories is the bust.

Dunno why Labour don't call them on it though.

Carolddcker clegg said he was against tuition fees but when in office they were introduced, he had to go back on his pledge.

I'll be voting conservative and if thats where you want to use your vote, because you agree with their policies and think the current gov has done a good job, then I'd encourage you to take no notice of the hysterical mob claiming you must be heartless, stupid or a psychopath Unfortunately there are always a number of vocal left wingers who come out with this nonsense. There is nothing immoral about voting conservative.

However, you say you are also fond of the Greens. Why is that? Their policies are very different from the conservatives.

Nobody but nobody is being taxed on the number of bedrooms they have under the so called 'bedroom tax'. They are getting less HB if they are deemed to have too many rooms. I don't agree that the bedroom tax should have been applied to people who need extra rooms as they have a family member with a disability. But in principle I agree with a set amount of HB according to your needs of rooms. This will only bring council housing HB rules into lines with rules in the private sector rentals.

How is Farage any different to Cameron? He went to Dulwich College, didn't get into university (intellectual? really?) and was a commodities trader in the City - one of those bankers who helped destroy the economy. Not my idea of a "man of the people"

Archery the lack of smaller social houses in the fault of the local councils and housing associations who have not built enough because they assumed they would get the full funding from housing benefit even if under-occupied. If ocer-occupiers move into smaller private tenancies, then private tenants can move from larger properties to social housing. Net benefit is moving from a large private rent paid by housing benefit to small private rent paid by housing benefit, so less money for private landlords.

fastforward what was the mistake about tuition fees? It is a graduate tax in all but name and lower earners do not repay - what is the problem?

Op they have done a good job of looking after their own, who can afford public school or private education, private health care, university fees, have an inheritance to worry about, inherited property so no need to buy house. Not so good for people who need health service, social care, mental health, state / university education, affordable house, and those whose parents' money will be spent on care, in other words the majority of people who need to work to pay their way.
Clegg made a mistake with tuition fees but I think others have made bigger 'mistakes'.
Ukip are pandering to the lowest human instincts in encouraging distrust of 'foreigners' and i find them a bit scary.
Labour with Blair and Brown made mistakes but this lot are different they are systematically breaking the health services and have mostly been to public school with no understanding of real life for the majority of people. Death rates in health service are higher so yes people are dying Its not scaremingering. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/24/overcrowded-hospitals-deaths
Who you vote for depends on your values, do you believe everyone should only look after themselves (easy if you inherited £££££ ) or do you think we should care about each other ?

Why should a taxpayer fund spare rooms in for soemone else when they cannot afford one for themselves.
This is utter nonsense. "Fund"? The social housing stock has been decimated. There is little suitable housing, and nowhere for people deemed to be in "too large" homes to go. But no, you're right, let's put everyone into private accommodation, and speed up the government orchestrated transfer of public money into the hands of landlords.

Fantastic posts from Schnitzel and Hanna

caroldecker many of the people being sanctioned with the bedroom tax are very willing to move to properties where there are less bedrooms - but if those properties don't exist locally, then they can't move. They are stuck in an impossible position, through no fault of their own.

I think if we are going to talk about government policy that lead directly to deaths then everyone might want to take a minute or five to remember the Iraq war.

And you do all remember that it was Labour who first introduced tuition fees, PPI in the NHS, academies etc.

I personally think they're all as bad as each other and will struggle to choose who to vote for (not that it matters, I live in a top 5 safe seat).

The selective memory/rose tinted view of the previous Labour government on this thread is ridiculous though.

Melanie Social housing tenants with spare rooms have had thier benefit reduced to be in line with private tenants in reciept of housing benefit and people not in receipt of benefit.
Why should a taxpayer fund spare rooms in for soemone else when they cannot afford one for themselves.

Stella the socialist parties always have and always will shaft the poorer members of society. 100 years ago, Russis, Eastern Europe and most of Latin America was on a par with the US and Western Europe- where would you rather live today?

I'm a forriner so can't actually vote but DH can, anyway we've talked about the election and as a couple would probably be better off under the Tories but then I remember this quote...

“The True Measure of Any Society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members” – Ghandi (which I know, has been phrased in lots of different ways and attributed to lots of different people, but I think is a really good message)

Anyway that's how I try to make decisions (I can vote in local, eu and my own countries elections). I try to think what is the best for the most vulnerable in society and vote accordingly. I don't think the Tories are a good option for e.g. the poorest or people with disabilities.

You lost me at "bedroom tax"

So, some people have a spare room in their houses, for lots of different reasons. Those reasons include having a disabled child who needs the extra space.

The Tories answer is to effectively tax them on this. What action are they hoping to produce by this -that lots of people will pack up and move to smaller premises? Leaving homes they've grown up in? Suddenly everyone will be in houses with exactly the number of rooms as minimumly feasible? Who funds all the costs associated with moving!

Is this really a huge problem? Why have the Tories made it seem like it is?

I think the problem is that the radio and TV news give lots and lots of coverage to two-line soundbites of Cameron and Osborne declaring, with superbly confident smugness, that unemployment is down and the economy is up, with very little further analysis. So this is what the average person, without the time or inclination to dig further, takes at face value.

Look a little further, and the whole narrative starts to fall apart. The number of people claiming unemployment benefits may well be down, but how many of these have found decent jobs, as opposed to earning very little as self employed and being topped up by tax credits, on zero hours contracts, workfare, or having their benefits sanctioned?

Similarly, when this Government has borrowed more than any of the preceding ones, where do we get the idea that they're any good with the economy? Oh yeah, because they told us so

"He is also a decent man with a stellar education and intellect."

If you were talking about Farage then I couldn't disagree with you, but not Etonian Cameron. He has had the best education that money can buy but it seems to have passed him by. Tim Dim But Nice springs to mind.

"David Cameron's ignorance over Magna Carta and Rule Britannia exposed"
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9571852/David-Camerons-ignorance-over-Magna-Carta-and-Rule-Britannia-exposed.html

Postexpatlimbo David Cameron himself may not be that obnoxious (possibly, we're not personally acquainted) but there are a hell of a lot of slimy twats sitting on the benches behind him, who don't appreciate their privilege.

IMO the benefit changes (the conversion to Universal Credit) are as you have described NHS changes, a lot of expensive pissing about that won't actually improve anything.

I think the more Lib Dems we can get in gov't, the better insurance we have against the more ideologically-driven wacky ideas of either Tory or Labour.

I mean, eg the Tories wanted to make it OK to sack workers instantly for any reason - WTF? 'Er, boss, should this fire exit really be padlocked shut?' 'Don't bother coming in tomorrow, Steve.'
And Labour, despite their image, are drawn to interesting wheezes like PFI and not very big on civil liberties.