TORIES

franatash - good that makes at least four of us voting Tory then!

I was going to walk away from this thread - but I couldn't resist looking again .

I find it extraordinary that those who are berating the Tories for their supposed self interest are doing nothing less themselves - talking about all of the things that they personally will be losing out on. There is a much bigger picture here - this country is in SERIOUS financial trouble that is going to take 15 to 20 years to sort out, and we all have to suffer in order to rebuild the country and avoid relegation into the second tier of global economies, because otherwise the debt is going to become even more expensive to service, and take even longer to pay back.

This Government has wasted such VAST amounts of taxpayers' money it is terrifying - have any of you read Squandered? If you are a staunch Labour supporter, please do, just to understand the levels of financial ineptitude that our so called "prudent" chancellor foisted on the country. PPP anyone?! The eyewatering amounts of money that have been sloshing about in the labour coffers for the past 12 years and which have amounted to almost nothing is a complete and utter travesty for us all.

DH and I pay very significant amounts of tax every year, and I also pay my nanny's tax, insurance and employer's NI, and the only 'perk' we get from this Government is child benefit and the child trust fund - both of which are likely to disappear for higher rate taxpayers regardless of who comes in to Government next time around.

Yet, I am going to be a turkey voting for Christmas (because I am sure that the Tories will abolish both for higher rate tax payers) because this country's deficit needs to be brought under control - somehow - and I don't think that Darling and Brown have a clue what they are talking about, and certainly aren't the people to get us out of the mire, given that they got us here in the first place. If they'd read and understood any sort of economic theory, they would have understood that to talk about Labour bringing and end to boom and bust was the most preposterously arrogant thing to have ever said, and they may have saved more and spent less in the good times in order to have something in reserve now we're in this mess.

I also agree with scaryteacher Heaven help us us if labour got in again. Panicmode and scaryteacher both talk a lot of sense.

'If you think you might one day have kids/be ill/be made redundant/have a relative needing care etc etc etc'..............could be wrong but thought only in recent years you had to sell your home to fund care for the elderly. Also don't think there's any help with care for Alzheimers sufferers!

Don't get me started on Iraq and the lies and the fate of Dr David Kelly. This Labour Govt is underhand, lying and scary!

My heart sinks just a little further each time I hear another brave young man has been killed in Afghanistan..........Around 50 people were killed in 7/7 bombings but so far 251 soldiers have been sacrificed to make Britain safer! Am I the only one who just doesn't get this maths?

Scaryteacher and swedey - I love you!

Rofl at Elephants!

So, scarlet, you think it's unacceptable for me to point out st's grammatical errors but not for st to do it to other people? And you expect me to take your opinion seriously? How interesting.

Well said, Panicmode.Complete agreement

Ooh forgot to link to my glorifying of Speedy's comments here: new MN disclaimers

Is that an attempt at humour? Pathetic.

Yes, that's what I thought when scary did it to someone else. Glad you agree, scarletlily.

Nasty and completely unnecessary.

Rofl! 'word order'!

(always preview before posting!)

scaryteacher, you may be a teacher in RL but you are not a teacher on MN. So your eagerness to correct other people's grammar is badly misplaced here.

So. Your errors. Well they bear a resemblance in a way to the error that you pointed out, in that although technically they're incorrect, everyone knows what you mean and nobody gives a monkey's.

I'll highlight them in bold:

"Sending my ds private was the only way I could get wraparound care in one place to enable me to do my job teaching, as dh was away with HM Forces. Childcare in rural Cornwall is hard to come by, believe me, especially when there is no public transport, and your family live 3.5 hours away. Private school that took ds from 0745 to 1900 so I could put in a full day and teach after school as well was the practical solution. I didn't see anywhere in my terms and conditions of employment that I couldn't spend my salary how I pleased."

1. 'private' - should be: 'to a private school'
2. 'my job teaching' - should be: 'my teaching job'
3. 'dh' - should be: 'my dh' (you did write 'my ds' at the top of this paragraph so clearly you're just being grammatically lazy )
4. 'ds' - I don't need to repeat myself here, do I? See point 3 if unsure.
5. 'how' - should be: 'as I pleased'

Not to mention the fact that you are using a colloquial spoken style in written English, which is playing havoc with your word ordr. Outrageous.

So you can see, I hope, that my pointing out your grammatical errors has made me look like a bit of a moron. I'm sure you don't need me to explain how this relates back to your earlier post.

Coldtits - I don't think anyone will be benefitting from spending cuts in the short term.

Labour will do the same as the tories they just haven't admitted it yet!

Speaking as a child of the seventies, I was mightily relieved when free school milk was phased out. Never could abide drinking the stuff, especially whan it was warm and curdled in the summer.

Incidently, it was a Labour government - not a Conservative one - who began the process of phasing out free school milk. 1968, Harold Wilson.

As for the need for savage cuts - both Darling and Brown have conceded they are necessary.

I know there is a need. Even I, who would not benefit at all from such cuts, would accept them as a needed thing.

But they'll take ONLY from the poorest people in society. If they're going to fiddle with the benefits system - jolly good, it's not efficient and the money is splatter-gunned rather than targeted(am thinking of the £190 'healthy eating in pregnancy' grant which you can't obtain until the 3rd trimester and is a fucking pointless waste anyway, as those who eat healthily do so anyway and those who don't - won't).

But they're going to ghettoise the Surestart scheme buy cutting funding to all but the most impoverished areas, meaning many poor people will not attend it because they are too proud, and their children will miss out.

I've been fucked for years, and have been since I kept a baby to a man too feckless to support us properly. Looks like now I'll have to roll over and be buttfucked too.

Coldtits - There is a need for cuts in public spending. Britain is in danger of losing its AAA rating. Should that happen, our country's already very burdensome debts will become even more expensive to service.

It's a bit like having a loan from Barclays and not cutting down on other spending in order to service the loan. And then getting into trouble and taking another, higher interest, loan from another lender to pay the first loan.

Noddy - quite agree. Hopefully 10-15 years, not 20 will sort it. There will have to be tax rises in some form and public sector cuts to pay for the deficit. It would be good to see something like a bank tax as Obama has mooted in the US to get some of the money back from the banks.

they inherited a huge amount of money that had been culled from the poorest section of society via low wages, low benefits, and public funding cuts, none of which affects those who have good jobs and can afford to go private.

All labour did at first was give it back.

I am so close to getting a bullhorn and parading around in my local area, telling people what the Tories are actually going to DO so that they will register to vote.

People don't seem to think that this could be a lot worse. Yes, our country is in debt, but it could be so much worse. There is NO NEED for the savage cuts that are being proposed. gentler ones, better targeted, would be much easier for the population to bear.

my generation has never forgotten the loss of the children's milk, and the introduction of the minimum wage which meant we could live.

Hang on. We've had 12 years of Labour. They inherited a golden legacy of an economy from the Tories yet the rich-poor gap is wider than it has been for over 40 years And you all fear a Tory government?

Surestart was originally conceived as a way of helping disdvantaged children; in many areas it has been so colonised by the middle classes that poorer families are put off attending. How can it be wrong to try to target it at disadvantaged families? Yes, it would be nice to have a service everyone could use - but the countries finances are in such a state that savage spending cuts are going to have to be made. Even Brown has belatedly admitted that.

Personally, I would be in favour of cutting child benefit for higher income families. However, I remember a thread about this on MN a few monthgs back, and most posters were appalled at the thought. I doubt it would be a vote winner for any political party, so I don't suppose it will be in any manifesto.

Please point out my errors and I'll see if you are right or not. I once had fun in my NQT year pointing out to an English teacher that she had written would of and could of on the board, rather than would have and could have. She was most offended and flounced off to her HoD, only to return later and mumble an apology. My HoD always gave me stuff to proof read and spell check as it is something I can't help noticing.

EAM, 'Presumably you mean the right place = private school, where the rich kids hang out. So you believe your kids should achieve based on their merits, as long as "their merits" include being in the same class as other privileged children who can help your DCs later in life.' Nope, I didn't mean that. I was discussing dh's promotion prospects with him, and he said that if he had been in a different branch or deployed in Gulf War 1, Kosovo or Iraq, his promotion chances would have been higher. That is what I meant by right time, right place. I also don't think that having gone to a particular school means that your classmates will help you later in life. I don't think either dh or I keep up with any of our classmates from school, be they from my comp, or his boarding school. Life and geography get in the way. Ds will presumably keep up with those he likes once he leaves his school, and won't with those he doesn't. That is normal surely? The old school tie doesn't work in HM Forces, only the ability to do your job.

Don't worry EAM, I live abroad at the moment, and the house is let out. However, we will be back, so if you are in the Tamar Valley or near, watch out!

This is like a repeat performance of last time.labour Govt overspend and screw the economy People get pissed off and vote teh tories in.Tories bring in lots of unpopular measures to repair teh deficit which p people off but do the job so when labour get elected again they inherit a decent balance book and then proceed to trash it!Now we are in for another dose of the tories and all look to suffer.papers today hinting at basic rate tax rising from 3p to 5p and VAt to 20%.Did anyone see Clarke and Mandelson last night they didn't seem to think 20 yrs was a bad estimate as to how long this mess cold take to sort out !

the conservative party scare me. I am anathema to them. I'm a single mother in social housing, and will be doing a low paid job.

WE're going to starve. We are going to fucking starve.

Since my ex walked out on his job, and the tax credits overpaid me (my fault, I got confused) I lost £55 per week income. £20 of that has been made up by income support (thank heaven) but I have lost £35 per week real money and I'm scraping by as it is. Meanwhile food and fuel prices are going up - I have to spend £15 a week so my house isn't cold, and £25 to make it warm. Bread has doubled in price this past five years, ditto pasta, baked beans and other staples.

The spending cuts are going to hit me, and none of the promised benefits will. Marriage tax allowance? it's not my fault I haven't got a bloody husband to give it to!

I did not choose this life, and I honestly think it's up to me to get myself out of it, but how can they even think of cutting the Surestart scheme? It's for the most vulnerable children in this country - they are literally taking candy from a baby! Why not cut the child benefit spend - I know plenty of people who really don't need it. Lots of people save their child benefit, but designer shoes with their child benefit - I know one woman who has LOST it - can't remember which of the many banks it goes into and can't be bothered to find out. I buy bloody heating and food with mine!

They hate the poor. It can be the only explanation for their policies.