Mecky Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Hi Mort, Thank you for the steer,it does ger a bit difficult when you are trying to have a sensible ( if lively) discussion and are interrupted by schneid insulting deragatory one liners by the likes of Stan tumudo and Wednesday 1. Who make no positive contribution but seek to undermine others. (see above). Leave it with you and back on topic we go. Maybe you ought to practice what you preach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Genuine question..why did the Liberals reject a coalition with Labour in 2010? Was it because they were even further apart than the Tory's and Liberals..? Hi Truman not 100% sure but one of the main reasons cited by NC, was Gordon Brown being the main stumbling block. You have a good day now, I'm not returning to this discussion as, sorry to say there are far too many Tory bigots on it, that is not a dig @ you I don't know your political allegiances my friend, but for me enough is enough. Not going away beaten by any stretch of imagination, but just sick of the same thing being regurgitated, my own fault I should stay away, I only came back to post a compliment, be good. Some people on here are good to chat to & even banter & argue but, some I'm sorry but it was surely "a waste of a good bum when they put teeth in their mouths". Plus I love this forum & don't want banning, if I retort to them in my true feelings towards there total ineptitude to have a decent conversation. In fact I look forward to chewing the fat with yourself over different things, in the coming months.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Is that better, I made it it bold, now I made it red and big. That's what Cecil Parkinson and other high profile Tory shaggers used to boast about! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I don't know why any employee would support a scheme like this. All it will ensure, for them, is that, because of fear of unemployment, they will have to put up with lower pay and a reduction in conditions... The same thing can be said for all those supporting the benefit cuts, it'll just ensure you have to work harder, for less or starve.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I don't know why any employee would support a scheme like this. All it will ensure, for them, is that, because of fear of unemployment, they will have to put up with lower pay and a reduction in conditions... The same thing can be said for all those supporting the benefit cuts, it'll just ensure you have to work harder, for less or starve.... Or it means that everyone in a company will have to pull their weight and not expect the others there to take up the slack..always two ways to look at things.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Or it means that everyone in a company will have to pull their weight and not expect the others there to take up the slack..always two ways to look at things.. Well of course it does that wasn't my point at all. Those who do pull their weight will be worse off because they'll be easier to get rid of. Then there's the point that who actually says someone is pulling their weight? People who are pulling their weight will be got rid of, for whatever reason, using this as an excuse... You're not thinking it through.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Well of course it does that wasn't my point at all. Those who do pull their weight will be worse off because they'll be easier to get rid of. Then there's the point that who actually says someone is pulling their weight? People who are pulling their weight will be got rid of, for whatever reason, using this as an excuse... You're not thinking it through.... Why would a company get rid of someone who is working well if there are others there that are taking the p*** ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Genuine question..why did the Liberals reject a coalition with Labour in 2010? Was it because they were even further apart than the Tory's and Liberals..? Clegg said he would never take part in a government with Gordon Brown in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bypassblade Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Clegg said he would never take part in a government with Gordon Brown in it. Hi Xenia, I have said the same thing @ least 3-4 times already on this thread, maybe people are taking notice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I think LABOUR were very clever re the last election. They knew the mess they had created and that the mess would not be going away for many years. In fact I think they were quite happy not to form a government with the Liberals. They knew that no matter what the Tories did the way ahead was going to be very difficult. Ed Balls is now the brains in the LABOUR party, he knows that if they lose again in 2015 the situation should have improved enough for them to have a real go in 2020. Cameron was advised before the last election that 2010 would "be a good one to lose" in view of the poisoned chalice they would inherit. Real bottom line; British governments have little or no control of world events, world events dictate our destiny. BUT, if LABOUR had been prudent rather than spendthrift, cautious rather than cavalier, we would be in a far far better place than now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.