PRESLEY Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 not voting Tory again Should never have voted Tory in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Should never have voted Tory in the first place. Given that both Balls and Miliband have said they would continue with the Tories' current spending plans then what would have been different? Genuine question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Should never have voted Tory in the first place. Who should I have voted? ---------- Post added 01-10-2013 at 14:20 ---------- You reckon it would have been any better had Labour got in? Nothing to choose between any of 'em.. Yeah I know, I probably still will vote for them in truth can't see anyone better but I'll wait for the manifestos before I choose. Guessing this was a Clegg policy anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 How is the Daily Mail's support for Hitler over 70 years ago any more relevant than Ralph Miliband's hatred of the British people and Marxist views that he held a similar amount of time ago? Did Ralph Miliband hate the British people? Go and scour your beloved Mail for your evidence. Ooh look Ed Miliband's Dad was a Marxist. On another thread you were belittling feminists because they were concerned with middle/upper class issues. All this inconsistency would lead someone to think that you're vying to be the new Glenda Slagg of Private Eye. It's relevant because the Daily Mail accused his dead father of not being very British, and I'm saying that Rothermere's stance wasn't very British either. Okay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRESLEY Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 HI HO HI HO OF TO WORK THEY GO WITH A SHOVEL AND A PICK AND A WALKING STICK THEY WONT BE NO LONG TERM SICK :help: That'll match no long term jobs.:gag: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acdbelectric Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I certainly agree with the job for everyone as long as its not at the expense of our street cleaners etc,nobody should loose a job so the unemployed can have a job they probably don't want.i know not all people on the doll are lazy and have no interest in work but I know plenty that are so would be nice to see them at the bus stop on my way to work in the morning. Also to consider is in January when the barriers are dropped on immigration the. Our try is going to see another rapid influx of big families seeking asylum etc,or more foreign exports seeking work which will cause another big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 At the end of the day, you can't force people to do something they don't want to. You can stop their money, make them homeless or whatever, but they'll just steal more to eat (Interestingly, the police now say they are arresting previously unknown shoplifters for stealing food) and hang around the streets harassing people and being a general nuisance. That’ll keep the already stretched police busy. Put them in prison and it’ll cost more. You go down the Assad line etc and you have a queue of nations all wanting to jump on your back with humanitarian sanctions, trade sanctions, military action, bad press etc and I’m quite sure the government doesn’t want that. Given that you constantly go on about bullying tactics of the government, this post does sort of imply bullying tactics the other way around. 'Give me more money or we'll steal and riot and cost you more money'. You have to see their logic though. Pensioners are yet 'another drain on the public purse,' and we can't have that... Presumably they (or should that be 'we') should all be euthanised. First they came for the unemployed, then they came for the pensioners.... You're being ridiculous again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I certainly agree with the job for everyone as long as its not at the expense of our street cleaners etc,nobody should loose a job so the unemployed can have a job they probably don't want.i know not all people on the doll are lazy and have no interest in work but I know plenty that are so would be nice to see them at the bus stop on my way to work in the morning. Also to consider is in January when the barriers are dropped on immigration the. Our try is going to see another rapid influx of big families seeking asylum etc,or more foreign exports seeking work which will cause another big problem. They won't be seeking asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillpig Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 A little while ago Channel 4 on their 'fact check' site found that there are 6 or 7 people out of work chasing one job. The picture is even grimmer in some areas of the country. Yes I've heard about the smear campaign the Daily Mail are doing about Milliband's dead father. He was a Marxist academic, he was in the Royal Navy and fought the fascists in WW2, a victory of free speech over the tyranny of jackboot. The Daily Mail will know all about that given their support for Hitler in WW2. There maybe a few people who are entitled to benefits but don't claim them because they don't need them - but given that you've given yourself as an example I'll take it with a pinch of salt. Lots of people do feel ashamed of being on benefits, it's a horrible place to be - I've been on them and you are made to feel like dirt. You were Xenia another wind up merchant, and have reinvented a pseudonym for Sheffield Forum. I'd take little if anything you say seriously. Wrong in all regards including Xenia I am afraid. Also do not judge people who disagree with you as being "wind up merchants" . Abuse tends to indicate you have lost the argument. ---------- Post added 01-10-2013 at 17:20 ---------- How is the Daily Mail's support for Hitler over 70 years ago any more relevant than Ralph Miliband's hatred of the British people and Marxist views that he held a similar amount of time ago? I believe in history, if you we study it it prepares us for what's to come. The Daily Mail, like most of the British public actually did give Hitler the benefit of the doubt throughout most of the thirties. To claim that the Mail backed Hitler during the war is ludicrous indeed stupid. Millibands father is different, he was an active revolutionary socialist into the sixties. He clearly had direct influence on his sons, Eds latest statements indicate a serious lurch to the left, he clearly dislikes business, and is in thrall to the unions, although his latest pronouncements regarding the unions seem to indicate a move away from them, he is actually concerned that Mcluskey and co are seeking to supplant Labour and his, Millibands, power base. I appreciate that you should not judge the son by the actions of his father, but as so many from the left are so quick to judge Osborne, Cameron, and others of the Tories based on their backgrounds thought that in fairness we should seek to balance the information. So who do Forum members trust? The son of a stockbroker British to the core. Or the Son of a refugee who after being given asylum, sold secrets to the Russians and was actively involved in trying to bring the country to its knees? ---------- Post added 01-10-2013 at 17:25 ---------- Did Ralph Miliband hate the British people? Go and scour your beloved Mail for your evidence. Ooh look Ed Miliband's Dad was a Marxist. On another thread you were belittling feminists because they were concerned with middle/upper class issues. All this inconsistency would lead someone to think that you're vying to be the new Glenda Slagg of Private Eye. It's relevant because the Daily Mail accused his dead father of not being very British, and I'm saying that Rothermere's stance wasn't very British either. Okay? Not okay, you selectively criticize Rothermere who did no more than reflect the opinions of the British people during the 30s and freely admitted he was mistaken and worked tirelessly in Britains interests during the war.. Milliband was a revolutionary Marxist who turned on the country who saved him. He served in the Royal Navy and was strongly suspected of being in cahoots with the Russians. I believe there is evidence that he hated the British. ---------- Post added 01-10-2013 at 17:26 ---------- Some child minders work for £2 an hour if they only have one child to care for, and on the days they have 6 children to care for they earn £12 an hour. ---------- Post added 01-10-2013 at 11:21 ---------- Cockle pickers wages are to rise to £2 per hour to enable them to keep their heads above water. I am sorry, but I refuse to reply to a post as vile as this. Have you no shame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 There it's happening already in Museums. Grants are cut by the government, which leads to redundant staff, replaced by volunteers. This is also happening in local libraries. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-24332116 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.