To think that all Labour supporters must be a bit bloody thick?

[massivemammaries]

I don't understand it ........ Every one I have heard moans on about being worse off under the Coalition ... why do they all think the money to bail us out of Browns' catastrophic fuck up should come from somebody else? don't they get it? we all have to pay now.

And why oh why would anybody in their right mind want Labour in again after what they have done to our country??

I am at a loss

Personally - all this "Big Society" and "We're all in it together" bollocks is what pisses me off more than anything. Anyone who cannot see through that self serving claptrap might well be more open eyed following the 20th October. This is just the beginning folks.

If labour had got in they were also committed to making cuts etc. But the way the tories will go about saving money will protect the white middle class and fuck over everyone else.

I also think this is their perfect excuse to make cuts in social spending that they would have loved to do anyway.

make not do, sorry.

Hefty - even the Tory conference delegates were mystified by the Big Society. None of them clapped those bits of Cam's speech.

at the idea expressed below that the Tories give a flying fuck about the poor. Their track record shows they love nothing more than giving the sick, the poor and the vulnerable a good kicking.

And spending like there's no tomorrow till the IMF call time and force even harsher cuts than those already slated is caring about the poor? you lefty labour voters?

I think that most people are too dim to get the message of the Big Society.

It's not a good phrase, though the idea- of personal and collective responsibility- lies at the heart of Conservative ideology.

Oh, and I remember Thatcher- she was great. And Ted Heath who was useless. And Harold Wilson who was even more useless.

A lot of people seem to be in denial about the state of the public finances. Cuts are not optional they are essential due to the size of the deficit that we currently have. Whichever Party was in power there would be severe spending cuts as you cannot go on with a deficit which is 12% of GDP.

The latest I saw on TV was about how GB kept orders in place for military aircraft ( that were not needed) made in his constituency so that he could be assured of their votes.
Now, we have to have defence cut backs on essential equipment, housing, and ammunition etc.

Add to that the lack of proper control of the public sector- whose work force grew like a cancer, out of control for years as ameans of securing more traditional voters.

Labour were supposed to represent the working classes but time after time they have shown they are hypocrits who are self-serving.

The whole country was run on credit that had nothing to do with global recession as much as GB tried to convince us- he shied away from regulating the banks and cosied up to the City when it suited him.

Tories not interested in protecting the middle classes either sausage. They're the ones who get their child benefit taken away and have to stump up 10 grand in tuition fees for their kids to go to university and now they're after our pensions.

No, the tories are pure and simply the party for the very rich with no social conscience.

a thought about the OP has just occurred to me

I have just been called a lying arse just for admitting, in a light hearted way, that I was a Tory on another thread.

If I was to start a thread saying
"AIBU to think all tories are lying arses" I think lots of people would immediately pile in to say YANBU.

While I have already said that I don't agree with the rudeness of the OP, I think it is quite likely that a lot of people on this thread would see no harm in a title like this. It would be an interesting experiment!

I voted Labour at the last election, but having now seen the truth about the horrendous levels of borrowing right through the boom years, with nothing put aside at all (which Brown admits and is unrepentant about) I am relieved they didn't get back in. He was planning to carry on borrowing! So much of the money spent was wasted too, on PFI and the infrastructure for identity cards and art clubs for the offspring of the middle classes (I went to them, they were lovely, but social engineering they were not) and so on. Yes, I approve of the minimum wage and disability discrimination legislation and many other things which I think have changed our country for the better, but the creeping encroachment of the state into private lives (more phone-tapping, anti-terror legislation, ID cards), joining Bush's war (at huge financial cost- I don't like to think of how much, quite apart from the appalling human cost) and the revelation of the hopeless smoke and mirrors mismanagement of the economy has utterly disillusioned me. I'm not thrilled with the Tories - I'm scared - but we could not go on as we were either.

Hmmm... InGodWeTrust... who's going to look after all the disabled kids/adults while their parents/carers go off to work 'cos they don't get DLA any more??(Not YOU, I hope!)
And where will these jobs come from??
(Sorry - just had to get that in there.)
As per who's in charge of the country... it doesn't seem to make a difference who does it. None of them seem to have a clue.
I reckon anyone running for the job of Prime Minister ought to be made to see if they can organise a pissup in a brewery first.

"I seriously think economics should be compulsory so I don't have to listen to monkeys throwing shit at Gordon brown all day".

Hedgeblunder - Gordon Brown's stupidity and incompetence have ruined this country. Decent, hard working families are all paying the price now for the damage he has done. But then I guess in your labour-fantasy land, stuff like selling off 400 tons of our gold reserves between 1999 and 2002 when gold prices were at a 20 year low is a great idea. That act alone cost £2 billion.

Well if you look at the demographics, Tory voters are typically more educated than labour voters. Over 50% of labour voters have limited qualifications so surely they don't really have a knowledge of the economy?

Labour is a very nice idea. Yay, more spending on education, more benefits, better healthcare, whoopee! But where is all this money going to come from? . Raise taxes on the rich I hear you say? How? Would you like to lower the HR tax band to include more of the squeezed middle? Raise the HR to 70%? Do tell me how much tax you think that will raise, because as a higher rate tax payer if the higher band went up much more I'd seriously consider leaving the country, as would a lot of my colleagues. Tax businesses? So they move head offices overseas to avoid it and take jobs away from the country? Inheritance tax? People will find ways to avoid it as they do now. So come on labour voters, I'm all ears!!

Let's just put this into perspective for those screaming for the bankers bonuses to be taxed more heavily. Say you tax the big bankers (top 100) more heavily and get 1 million more in tax from each (a very very optimistic viewpoint because if I had to pay a extra 1m in tax a year, I know I'd leave the bloody country!). That's 100m more tax a year. Probably half that when you take into account those leaving.
Now, (and I'm not saying this should be done, merely giving examples), if you don't increase JSA in line with inflation, so the real terms cut is £1 per week per person (£52 per year), you have already saved 130 million, 30m more than by taxing big bankers.

What I'm trying to illustrate is that taxing the "big earners" at stupid rates just doesn't work.

Also, anyone with a basic knowledge of economics knows that boom and bust is the way things go? GBH was mind blowingly arrogant to try and suggest he'd fixed it.

I'm not a rich, greedy, selfish cunt, I just believe that fairness cannot be built on the back of a weak economy. See others comments on the national debt for reasons why I think labour are certainly unable to do this. The ethos of the party is generally blinded.

I am dying for a socialist to properly explain to me how left wing ideals wil help the economy. You can't help the poor if there is no money, simple as, I think you're pretty thick if you can't see that.

You're three years late to the debate, Help.

Ha I'm so sorry ! Serves me right for googling politics

Sis you not see the Zombie warning?!?!

Er did...

Gosh. Jolly glad that there's someone as super clever and observant as Help to show us thickies the light... Phew.

Can't be a.r.s.e.d..
History has taught us that Labour get us into the mess without providing enough of a safety net and Conservatives come out looking ugly because they are the ones looking like the bad guys when they have to make cuts to find the damned money to pay for the debt. I think it's been a bit of everyone really - government, banks, investors, JOE-AVERAGE thinking 'he' can have his cake and eat it by getting into debt to live life like the Jones's.
We've been in fianancial messes before and we'll get ourselves out of it only to launch ourselves back into one years later. It's a vicious circle but hey-ho that's life. jJust got to get on with it the best we can and understand that not everyone will EVER agree on how!

The Conservatives inherited a GROWING economy in 2010. Gordon Brown's government was fixing the economy. The coalition threw that growth potential away through cuts that were entirely fuelled by ideology and not be reasoned economic argument. Only now, three years on, is the economy doing anything that looks like a recovery.

You don't fix a deficit by ruining the economic wellbeing of the masses. You fix a deficit by investing wisely in things that will bring about growth by creating jobs, which in turn create tax payers and consumers.

Bollocks! They even left a note to say there's nothing left!

Ground hog day.

Your entire OP is based upon a fallacy by the way. Try reading this