spooky3 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 I see it as blatant hypocrisy. How much volunteering are politicians going to do? They're the ones with their hands in the pot more than anyone else. When they buy their own floating duck houses I might have some time for the idea. People keep on saying how much more these people could earn in the private sector, well, maybe this is their charity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Thatcher was made into a hate figure for trying to tell people that, people were so used to the idea that "the society" would do it for them and it wasn't their problem. Thatcher became a hate figure because she pulled the rug from hundreds of communities in this country as she went on her crusade against the 'smokestack industries' which made up the manufacturing backbone of the country, destroying hundreds of thousands of jobs and lives in the process and damaging the economy in the long term. 30 years on and everyone's saying we need to rebalance the economy away from property specualtion and financial services rubbish. Cameron himself said as much, the next week the ConDems stopped the loan to Sheffield Forgemasters, preventing the creation of hundreds of real jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 "It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business..." ..would you say? Or course, some people cannot look after themselves for whatever reason, and those are the ones that people who can look after themselves, should look to first. Also, those people will get State help, paid for by taxes; which is only another form of everybody else looking after them, after all. But since there isn't enough money at the moment, it means either raise taxes, or push for a "Bigger Society"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 People keep on saying how much more these people could earn in the private sector, well, maybe this is their charity! The justification for claiming false expenses, is that MPs are dedicating their lives to charity with only a £65,000 salary, expenses, a fine pension and the employment of family as staff as the rewards? You believe that to be true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 I'm not trying to politicise it, it is political. To talk of 'Big Society' on the back of cutting public services and an expenses scandal, the idea is intrinsically political. It isn't political. All the parties know that this must be done. Do you realise what this means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Do you realise what this means? It is a population graph. May I prod you to rush to the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 But since there isn't enough money at the moment, it means either raise taxes, or push for a "Bigger Society"... Although David Cameron denies it, the Big Society is because he wants the state to withdraw & take a back seat. All of which might be easier to swallow, but what sticks in my throat is the years of Tory ministers and their attck dogs in the Tory press sneering at the 'do gooders' and 'bleeding hearts' in the voluntary sector when they opposed Government policy. Britain already has one of the highest participation rates in volunteerism - they don't need a millionaire telling them to do more of it when they've been doing it for decades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 The justification for claiming false expenses, is that MPs are dedicating their lives to charity with only a £65,000 salary, expenses, a fine pension and the employment of family as staff as the rewards? You believe that to be true? There are many heads of charities who get more than that! They could get more in the private sector. Many have had proven track records in the private sector and given it all up to do just this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 (edited) Although David Cameron denies it, the Big Society is because he wants the state to withdraw & take a back seat. ... Oh, I see, it's nothing to do with the fact we are broke? (Sarcasm!) Edited February 13, 2011 by spooky3 Sarcasm note! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 big sociiety should start with cameron spending a month on a council estate to connect with people on their level and get to know them and also get to know what it's like to be the under class. Some of our biggest industry leaders have come from Council estates. Surely it's about what you make of life and the society around you! Or are you all about blaming others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now