• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Government U-Turn

News just breaking of yet another Government u-turn, this time concerning tax breaks on charitable donations.

This latest u-turn joins the following:

1. *struggle cuddle* anonymity
2. Selling off the forests
3. Vanity photogapher on the public payroll
4. School sports
5. Scrapping free milk
6. Cutting Bookstart
7. Cutting debt advice
8. Cutting housing benefit for long-term jobseekers
9. Coastguard cuts
10. Circus animal bans
11. BBC World Service cuts
12. Enshrining the Military Covenant in law
13. Cutting support for disabled people in care homes
14. Automatic prison sentences for carrying a knife
15. Immigration target policy reduced to an "ambition
16. 50% sentence reductions for an early guilty plea
17. Scrapping the office of chief coroner
18 Scrapping the Youth Justice Board
19. Scrapping domestic violence protection orders
20. Unannounced Ofsted inspections
21. Child benefit
22. Video games tax relief
23. Granny tax
24. NHS targets
25. Armed forces capability cuts
26. Joint Strike Fighter
27. Recalling MPs
28. International aid - 0.7% target
29. Scottish referendum timing
30. Pasty tax
31. Caravan tax
32. Secret inquests
33. Charity tax

I'm not greatly political at all, so don't have any agenda to push - but, in my opinion, it doesn't appear to be very good government if you're constantly changing your mind? I think we could all appreciate the odd one of two changes in approach or strategy, but a whole raft of them? Doesn't exactly fill one with confidence that they have the slightest fudging clue what they're doing, does it? Moreover, the financial projections which are released are - at least - consistent...consistently miles off.

No problem at all with having strong Government. But this is now becoming embarrassing; weak, flaky policies and laughable number-crunching.

How can they get things so wrong, so often??? Were they a board of directors, they'd be disbanded on a vote of no confidence.

coalition governments have too many differences to present a unified manifesto.
 
It was more lab than con. But centre politics is what most people want. He's trying to make a comeback I hear!
 
The fact we ran a surplus from 98 onwards tells me all I need to know. Labour kept the Tory spending plans in the first term they were in. Remember Brown and his 'prudence'? You really do know fudge all don't you? Run along.

That could very well be true, and I will not pretend to be an expert on politics. Most of my counter arguments are questions rather than statements.

However thats the difference between us, I know what I dont know, you quite clearly have limited knowledge on these subjects but are giving the tory side of the argument as if it is fact and as if you are an expert - the biggest example of this was when you repeated back a set of (misleading) government statements on uni fees without really looking into whether it was true or not, all I did was take 10 minutes to read up on it and could see straight away it wasnt as clear as you were trying to portray it.

If you are not willing to read/think about both sides of the argument from a neutral position, dont bother entering a discussion on it. I see no point to this 100% bias stuff that you do.
 
No you waded in. Talked gonads and stated with assurance an opinion that tried to belittle my statement. When in fact you know fudge all. It's generally a prerequisite to engage in discussion, having a fudging clue what you're talking about. You don't.
 
To add. Everything I stated about the new fees was referenced and backed up. Most people agreed with my argument. Unlike you who seems to be a blind Labour voter who defends mass slaying of Iraqis and state sanctioned intelligence falsification because 'tone' told you it was a good idea.
 
No you waded in. Talked gonads and stated with assurance an opinion that tried to belittle my statement. When in fact you know fudge all. It's generally a prerequisite to engage in discussion, having a fudging clue what you're talking about. You don't.

Your statement was "there would be no debt if the tories were in from 97-10" ... now for a start my response was belittling the people in the party at the time if anything (but i forgot you take it personally, again drop the bias rubbish, i was criticising the tories not you) but as for your statement... its stupid. No other word for it. You have made a pointless statement as we will never know what would have happened had the tories been in power during that time.

And from now onwards if you want the pre-requisite of having a clue about politics before posting on it, ill gladly stop posting for that reason as long as you agree to do the same ? I dont know why you pretend you do know about this stuff.
 
Just because you embarrass yourself on a regular basis here doesn't mean I'll stop showing you up so no deal I'm afraid.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/...unemployment-rate-rises?mobile-redirect=false

Oh look!!! The US has higher unemployment than the UK and all the data is going to brick even with that 800 billion STIMULUS they had!!!! I wonder what Balls thinks of this news?

You cannot spend your way out of a debt crisis and you cannot immunise yourself from a global debt crisis. The US will go into recession along with the rest of Europe if it all goes tits up. The ****s in the Labour party don't have a clue. Let them say what EXACTLY they'd do rather than blindly oppose every fudging policy put forward.
 
Your statement was "there would be no debt if the tories were in from 97-10" ... now for a start my response was belittling the people in the party at the time if anything (but i forgot you take it personally, again drop the bias rubbish, i was criticising the tories not you) but as for your statement... its stupid. No other word for it. You have made a pointless statement as we will never know what would have happened had the tories been in power during that time.

And from now onwards if you want the pre-requisite of having a clue about politics before posting on it, ill gladly stop posting for that reason as long as you agree to do the same ? I dont know why you pretend you do know about this stuff.

Nope. You can just STFU and we'd all be happy. Now back to your tax evasion.
 
To add. Everything I stated about the new fees was referenced and backed up. Most people agreed with my argument. Unlike you who seems to be a blind Labour voter who defends mass slaying of Iraqis and state sanctioned intelligence falsification because 'tone' told you it was a good idea.

No, it really wasnt backed up. I have no doubt you understand what the new uni fees structure is, but putting the spin on it that the tories have done can not be backed up. Its not a better system, its not fairer compared with previous years. I said in the thread what the previous years had to pay and you'd have to be stupid to believe new students are getting a good deal just because they dont pay upfront and pay less back each month (which actually makes it more in the long run). Again fees might have to be high from now on to cover the cost, but lets not pretend students will be getting a great deal from now on.

Also, I've never voted Labour... so.... dont know what you are talking about. Obviously in your mind anyone who isnt willing to be 100% pro tory is against them, GHod knows why you take it so personally but if you didnt have this bias to the tories you would see that I often agree with stuff they do. Obviously with the number of pro tory threads you create on here I try to add balance, just as if the forum was heavily biased on the labour side I would probably look like an anti labour person for the same reason.

As for the war, Id see the reasoning no matter who was in power at the time. If it had been the tories im quite sure you'd have a different opinion. Tories could have come in and pulled everyone out straight away, but I agree with them for not doing so. As for mass slaying of Iraqis... errr.... yes that is what Saddam was doing, but I never defended him. (and if its any consolation, the one Iraqi person I know was in favour of the war, obviously you dont understand what life was like for their people).
 
Yawn. Utter gonads the lot of it. And I don't create threads on here. Look at the number over the past 6 months. for a non labour voter you sure defend their policies. Look in this thread at my posts slagging the Tories for the uturns. So yet again, can't back up blind statements with actual facts.
 
Why are you arguing that you didn't defend saddam? Errr, yeah we know? Do you actually know what side of the debate you're on or do you just mindlessly troll and forget what the fudge you've said?
 
Just because you embarrass yourself on a regular basis here doesn't mean I'll stop showing you up so no deal I'm afraid.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/...unemployment-rate-rises?mobile-redirect=false

Oh look!!! The US has higher unemployment than the UK and all the data is going to brick even with that 800 billion STIMULUS they had!!!! I wonder what Balls thinks of this news?

You cannot spend your way out of a debt crisis and you cannot immunise yourself from a global debt crisis. The US will go into recession along with the rest of Europe if it all goes tits up. The ****s in the Labour party don't have a clue. Let them say what EXACTLY they'd do rather than blindly oppose every fudging policy put forward.

Leeds, you really do need to shut up. You come across like a raving mad man when talking about the tories. Blind acceptance is embarrassing, but I dont do that do I ? Ive said im not an expert and willing to take listen and accept points from either side. I am fully willing to accept the tories have some good policies. But if the trend on this forum is for bias tory rubbish that clearly isnt true, then I will post saying that.

As for Labour saying exactly what they would do, I agree yes that would be a good thing. It makes sense that the opposition should state this if in disagreement (see, maybe you should try that - posting from a neutral position).
 
Why are you arguing that you didn't defend saddam? Errr, yeah we know? Do you actually know what side of the debate you're on or do you just mindlessly troll and forget what the fudge you've said?

Jeez this is hard work. I've said this before, I know you arent the sharpest tool, but if I really have to explain that post then I will.

You stated I defended the slaying of Iraqis... basically you were trying to say I defended us dropping bombs on the iraqi people. But I took that statement and turned it around, because the alternative option (to allow Saddam to remain in power) also would see the slaying of Iraqi people. Basically what I was trying to point out that your statement would be true for both of our views.

As for the Iraqi person living in England, I suspect you are hinting that I could be making it up but it is very much true. As a 4 year old this Iraqi had a gun to his head with a picture of Saddam held up "who is this?" luckily this 4 year old knew. But if you dont want to accept my nice little story, just youtube the saddam statue being ripped down if you were in doubt about what their people were thinking at the time.
 
Last edited:
Yawn. Utter gonads the lot of it. And I don't create threads on here. Look at the number over the past 6 months. for a non labour voter you sure defend their policies. Look in this thread at my posts slagging the Tories for the uturns. So yet again, can't back up blind statements with actual facts.

You make more pro tory posts than anyone else on here, lets put it that way. And anyone who dares to question it gets a foul mouthed ranting response.

Which Labour policies have I defended ? I mentioned my stance on the war, its a tough one and I said its not as easy for the people in charge to just say 'war is wrong lets never do it' but apart from that most of my posts on politics have been regarding tory policy (which makes sense as they have the power right now) and posts against people who do this blind 'labour bad tory good' style posting. Your ridiculous statement about what would have happened 97-10 if the tories had been in says it all, in your mind its fact but in everyone elses its 'we'll never really know for sure'.

Now, go and enjoy your holiday, stop taking tory criticism so personally and realise that you also know very little about politics (and wont do until you open your mind, just as I wont do until I take more interest). I look forward to your next set of foul mouthed rants tomorrow (but also before you make them consider the fact I tend to drop out of threads when they become repetitive and predictable, so I probably wont see it).
 
Last edited:
I don't doubt you know an Iraqi. There are plenty of them here now we've fudged their country up and if he is a Sunni living in a Shia area or vice versa hell be in danger of getting killed. The point is saddam was a evil bastard and killed his own people. We have now killed more people according to UN estimates. But whereas before the country was at least secular and stable, now it's deteriorating into sectarian violence. Just like Syria is. And Assad deserves to die but be careful what you wish for. My point about the Tories and the debt stands. As for the rest, I'll allow others to pass judgement on your political persuasion.
 
Back