Areas you disagree with The Conservatives?

[smartie]

Please justify ID cards - I can see no advantage whatsoever.

[AndrewW-G]

i'm no superhero said:

I favour ID cards,

Good idea in theory, terrible in practice, only a matter of time before random police "lets see your ID / Papers juden " stops started and more likely demands to see ID before any financial transaction for "fraud prevention" purposes.

I can however see a use for them, in assisting with electronic elections . . . . . . wander into a voting booth, swipe card, thumb print on reader, then vote on the issue / referndum / election in hand, however I doubt that was labours plan for them

i'm no superhero said:

think that national minimum wage is a good idea

Yes it is, although tends to keep wages down for lower order jobs

i'm no superhero said:

I supported the banking bailout.

Again good in theory, terrible in practice, forcing some of the mergers on Lloyds, took a strong bank and drove it to the brink, handling of Northern Rock was in part responsible for the severity of their problems

i'm no superhero said:

I think the Conservatives got every call on the recession wrong.

they were in opposition, therefore they didnt actualy get to make and descisions on the recession, they did however get the cause of it right.............over heating economy, with a housing boom allowed to run away with itself

i'm no superhero said:

I think Labour have served the NHS well(ish), with reference to cancer care and waiting times.

the big problems will come when all the new facilites have to be paid for, average PFI is essentialy a nothing to pay for X years type of lease hire agreement and the payment terms mean we will pay for the hospitals several times over

i'm no superhero said:

I also disagree with them on these areas;

• I support a third LHR runway, STN and LTN runways to be built.

Yep so do I, but I understands the concerns of both the locals and the greens

i'm no superhero said:

* Crack down on road works, introducing lane rental for some of our busiest roads;

our roads are in a terrible shape, so we need more road works and better management of them, as we already pay for them via VED, any further payment schemes should be shelved indefinatley

i'm no superhero said:

* Facilitate the switch to green cars by creating a national car recharging network.

Electric cars and charging technology hasnt reached the point where recharging points would be of great benefit, given the alternatives which will come on stream over the next 10 years, it may be a network thats out of date within two elections

i'm no superhero said:

* Give full weight to the benefits of low carbon projects in cost-benefit appraisals.

What on earth is a low carbon project, is that one of the schemes where we pay an indian company millions to close down a north eastern steel works in return for magic beans that will help kill ManBearPig?

i'm no superhero said:

I also feel for the poor if they are hit hard by tax rises the most, yet I know that in practise tax rises are absolutely necessary.

ConLibs have already agreed to work towards a £10k tax threshold

i'm no superhero said:

What's wrong with me? I know we need change, but when Milliband becomes the party leader and the Labour party are reinvigorated, I am worried I may become a Labour fan boy. Thoughts?

Read what each party has to say, do your own research and make your own mind up

Edited by AndrewW-G on Thursday 13th May 18:58

[Simbu]

I think they've marginalised themselves in Europe, so now they have alot less influence than they ought to. Leaving the large right-wing bloc to join some far-right randoms from Eastern Europe with a less than stellar reputation is not a good strategy IMO.

[Crafty_]

The first issue with ID cards is that Government are unable to run IT projects to a timescale or budget, no matter how big they are. So if the government say its going to cost £500m and be ready in a year you can bet it'll take 2.5 years and cost £1bn+.
Then to justify the cost and time they'll use it for other things as well, which then justifies more money and time..

The end result is a never ending project that costs a fortune and never achieves what it was meant to in the first place.

This is quite separate from any objection to the idea of the damm things.

[i'm no superhero]

AndrewW-G said:

Read what each party has to say, do your own research and make your own mind up

Oh I regularly trowl political websites; I am Conservative in almost all areas. Just these few that nark me!

[Jasandjules]

i'm no superhero said:

What's wrong with me? I know we need change, but when Milliband becomes the party leader and the Labour party are reinvigorated, I am worried I may become a Labour fan boy. Thoughts?

Don't worry, there is always seppuku if you feel yourself leaning towards voting for the self serving scum.

[i'm no superhero]

Jasandjules said:

i'm no superhero said:

What's wrong with me? I know we need change, but when Milliband becomes the party leader and the Labour party are reinvigorated, I am worried I may become a Labour fan boy. Thoughts?

Don't worry, there is always seppuku if you feel yourself leaning towards voting for the self serving scum.

(Had to Wikipedia that!)

[WhoseGeneration]

i'm no superhero said:

I favour ID cards,

I'm just going to comment on this.
The ID cards proposed by the last Government were not bits of paper with just your photo on.
They were "smart" cards.
Which would have got smarter, meaning the Government could have controlled much of your existence.
"Sorry sir, you can't buy this bottle of wine, your ID card tells me you've already had your allowed limit this week".
Your car says, "Sorry I can't start, you've used up your carbon limit, from me, this month".
Get real, the State should only exist because, we, it's Citizens, allow it to.
ID cards absolutely reverse that relationship, meaning the Citizens only exist because the State says so.
Did you ever read up on the proposals?
I'm not a rabid Rightwinger either.

[i'm no superhero]

WhoseGeneration said:

i'm no superhero said:

I favour ID cards,

I'm just going to comment on this.
The ID cards proposed by the last Government were not bits of paper with just your photo on.
They were "smart" cards.
Which would have got smarter, meaning the Government could have controlled much of your existence.
"Sorry sir, you can't buy this bottle of wine, your ID card tells me you've already had your allowed limit this week".
Your car says, "Sorry I can't start, you've used up your carbon limit, from me, this month".
Get real, the State should only exist because, we, it's Citizens, allow it to.
ID cards absolutely reverse that relationship, meaning the Citizens only exist because the State says so.
Did you ever read up on the proposals?
I'm not a rabid Rightwinger either.

Looking them up on the web, I can now understand opposition. I stand corrected. This site is quite a good reference actually: http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate...

I only ever took in to account the "if you've got nothing to worry about, why shouldn't we have them" point. Should have looked in to it more beforehand! I stand corrected.

[WhoseGeneration]

i'm no superhero said:

Looking them up on the web, I can now understand opposition. I stand corrected. This site is quite a good reference actually: http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate...

I only ever took in to account the "if you've got nothing to worry about, why shouldn't we have them" point. Should have looked in to it more beforehand! I stand corrected.

Don't worry, you have now looked for yourself, using the resource that is the Internet.
Then have come to a more considered opinion.
More knowledge for all is for the good of all.

[Fittster]

i'm no superhero said:

I think the Conservatives got every call on the recession wrong.

The should have stuck to their guns and rejected bail outs.

[T89 Callan]

Oh god it's I'm No Superbrain again.

I assume PH will be swamped with stuff like this now that most of the liebour party (and soon all their public sector goon supporters) are out of work.

[WhoseGeneration]

T89 Callan said:

Oh god it's I'm No Superbrain again.

I assume PH will be swamped with stuff like this now that most of the liebour party (and soon all their public sector goon supporters) are out of work.

Don't be stupid.
Provide rational argument, as have I.

[OnTheOverrun]

i'm no superhero said:

and I supported the banking bailout.

So did the tories.

i'm no superhero said:

I think the Conservatives got every call on the recession wrong.

Could you list the bits they got wrong for us please?

i'm no superhero said:

I think Labour have served the NHS well(ish), with reference to cancer care and waiting times.

They have done so by spending money we don't have and entering into PFI's that cost them nothing and made them look good, but now we have to pay them back now they've gone.

i'm no superhero said:

I also feel for the poor if they are hit hard by tax rises the most, yet I know that in practise tax rises are absolutely necessary.

Labour removed the 10p tax break and the new govt is introducing no tax at all on the first £10k of earnings. How do you work that out to be worse for the poor?

i'm no superhero said:

What's wrong with me? I know we need change, but when Milliband becomes the party leader and the Labour party are reinvigorated, I am worried I may become a Labour fan boy. Thoughts?

There's nothing wrong with you other than a basic misunderstanding of the facts and an in-built predisposition as a long time labour supporter (which you undoubtedly are, despite this mildly obfuscated attempt at a troll) to criticise a non-labour govt even though it's only day two.

[caziques]

Government isn't the solution to the problem - government is the problem.

Wouldn't it be great to work out how much you wanted to spend, and then go and tell your employer how much salary you wanted to cover it.

Virtually all governments since the second world war have tended to increase the percentage of the economy they control - to my mind this percentage should be falling with time - growth would still allow for extra spending in real terms. It needs someone (the PH party?) to declare the long term aim of no more than 30% control of the economy.

The conservatives will at least be better than winky - but they will still interfere far too much.

[don4l]

caziques said:

Government isn't the solution to the problem - government is the problem.

Wouldn't it be great to work out how much you wanted to spend, and then go and tell your employer how much salary you wanted to cover it.

Virtually all governments since the second world war have tended to increase the percentage of the economy they control - to my mind this percentage should be falling with time - growth would still allow for extra spending in real terms. It needs someone (the PH party?) to declare the long term aim of no more than 30% control of the economy.

The conservatives will at least be better than winky - but they will still interfere far too much.

The PH party already exists. It is called UKIP.

Unfortunately, most PH'ers put their hatred of Labour above their own beliefs.


Don
--

[The Black Flash]

caziques said:

Government isn't the solution to the problem - government is the problem.

I like this guy. Can we keep him?

[i'm no superhero]

OnTheOverrun said:

Could you list the bits they got wrong for us please?

i'm no superhero said:

I think Labour have served the NHS well(ish), with reference to cancer care and waiting times.

They have done so by spending money we don't have and entering into PFI's that cost them nothing and made them look good, but now we have to pay them back now they've gone.

i'm no superhero said:

I also feel for the poor if they are hit hard by tax rises the most, yet I know that in practise tax rises are absolutely necessary.

Labour removed the 10p tax break and the new govt is introducing no tax at all on the first £10k of earnings. How do you work that out to be worse for the poor?

i'm no superhero said:

What's wrong with me? I know we need change, but when Milliband becomes the party leader and the Labour party are reinvigorated, I am worried I may become a Labour fan boy. Thoughts?

There's nothing wrong with you other than a basic misunderstanding of the facts and an in-built predisposition as a long time labour supporter (which you undoubtedly are, despite this mildly obfuscated attempt at a troll) to criticise a non-labour govt even though it's only day two.

Recession - I overexaggerated a lot when I said every point. To start the cuts now is absolutetly necessary, from what I have read. However, to start the cuts when they thought was correct I think was too early - lets not forget the economy has only recently Jan) started positive growth. It would have been rash to start curts before now, re Keynes' idea that you spend yourself out of a recession/'an economy runs on animal spirits'.

NHS - yes, previous poster mentioned it, again I stand corrected. This was after having a browse on the Labour party site. Again, should've researched it in full.

Tax - specifically, VAT applied on food. I hope this isn't applied, as does Justin King (CEO Sainsbury's), due to the damage it would have on the poorest and retailer's profits. The poorest generally eat worse because they do not buy helathy food, as it is perceived to be more expensive. If it is made even more costly (perceived or in reality) then it will have implications for health of those who are poorest.

As for 10p tax, that was a disaster as is documented well. 10k allowance agreed.

Final point - not true, was not a troll and I have been a Conservative supporter since I began to form my own (non-parental!) views. There were a few policy areas I hadn't looked in to, and was going on assumed ideas.

[randlemarcus]

i'm no superhero said:

Recession - I overexaggerated a lot when I said every point. To start the cuts now is absolutetly necessary, from what I have read. However, to start the cuts when they thought was correct I think was too early - lets not forget the economy has only recently Jan) started positive growth. It would have been rash to start curts before now, re Keynes' idea that you spend yourself out of a recession/'an economy runs on animal spirits'.

Christmas and the scrappage lifted us above "totally " to "still pretty bad". Let's see if it stays above the waterline (and reflect that the figures pre-date the GE.

We have to start "cutting" - our cloth, that is. Everyone is talking about cutting the deficit. I'm sorry, that simply means we'll continue to spend more than we get. Doesn't work for me when I go overdrawn, why should the country be different. This will hurt, some departments and people more than others. C'est la vie.

i'm no superhero said:

Tax - specifically, VAT applied on food. I hope this isn't applied, as does Justin King (CEO Sainsbury's), due to the damage it would have on the poorest and retailer's profits. The poorest generally eat worse because they do not buy helathy food, as it is perceived to be more expensive. If it is made even more costly (perceived or in reality) then it will have implications for health of those who are poorest.

Hmm. Raised receipts from an industry that is more rapacious than the banks. Not seeing the downside. As far as the healthy food thing goes, does that mean we can cut the £2.5B advertising budget to get the thickies to eat properly? Huzzah, good spot, that man.

i'm no superhero said:

Final point - not true, was not a troll and I have been a Conservative supporter since I began to form my own (non-parental!) views. There were a few policy areas I hadn't looked in to, and was going on assumed ideas.

This last point is important - it shows, along with the thread as its rolled along, that you are capable of reading, understanding, and contextualising ideas, and forming your own opinion. I think that automatically denies you membership of the Labour party

[WhoseGeneration]

randlemarcus said:

This last point is important - it shows, along with the thread as its rolled along, that you are capable of reading, understanding, and contextualising ideas, and forming your own opinion. I think that automatically denies you membership of the Labour party

Indeed, except your analysis can apply to membership of any Political Party.
See the problem?