General Election 2010

[Craig 6700]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

[Christmas Tree 4835]

The idea of a hung parliament/coalition appeals to me on the one hand as I like the idea of a collaborative consensus drawing from a few sides of any debate. The argument against that has always been it restricts a government with a firm progressive mandate which is true but I think those days are over anyway.

 

I agree there is a shelf-life concept in the UK - to some extent I was surprised Major lost as I never found Blair's vision that inspiring - I had a feeling they would fail to right many of the wrongs but a bit of that was due to Major acting as a buffer from people's memories of what the bitch had done.

 

I would make the point that I've always found the concept of "What will they do for me?" to be a core fault. It may be idealistic but I'd like more people to think about the common good. I know that personally I would probably be better off under a Tory govenment but as someone who didn't suffer too bad personally last time but had to witness what they did to the NE and the rest of the country, I found it painful and wouldn't want a repeat.

 

But you cant for all time hold every conservative government responsible for what a previous government did? Where would you draw the line in history?

 

Not just the Thatcher government though was it? Historically tory governments have always been about representing the affluent and priveleged, and the South of England.

 

Have you seen the make up of the present tory party? Virtually all went to private schools, and most of them not even 'normal' private schools at that. Cameron and Osbourne, obviously the most significant tories, are both Etonians ffs. What on Earth makes you think this particular blue leopard will change its spots? Because they have a tree drawn by a 5 year old as their logo?

 

 

While not a great political historian, I am quite confident your comments have little truth or sense behind them.

 

Others will be more informed on the subject but didnt the tories introduce the pension, unemployment benefit and carry out massive social housing and school building programs in the pre second world ward days? Hardly representing the affluent!!!

 

I am sure there are plenty of other great achievements by Tory governments.

 

And as for having a go at potential leaders of the country for going to a very good school!!!!! Would you rather they went to Bensham comp?

 

Were the tories ever responsible for the things you mention? I don't honestly know, hopefully someone else does, but its telling you have to go back over 70 years to name any examples of how they have benefitted 'the common man'. They were resolutely against the foundation of the NHS though, I know that much. More fundamentally they obviously do not have socialist values by definition.

 

I'd rather have a leader based on merit, not privilege, wherever they're from. A person from Bensham has as much right to lead this country as one of those silver-spooned nobheads imo.

 

 

Tell that to all the commen folk who now own their council house.

 

Nice to know Thatcher's bribe still has sway with people. Pity it has resulted in a housing crisis for so many people though, who now can't afford to buy their own property but can't find decent accomodation to rent. This is all part of the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude which has plagued our society since the 80s imo.

 

Where are they all then???

 

And lets not forget, Labour has had 13 years to address any housing shortage.

[Renton 22003]

The idea of a hung parliament/coalition appeals to me on the one hand as I like the idea of a collaborative consensus drawing from a few sides of any debate. The argument against that has always been it restricts a government with a firm progressive mandate which is true but I think those days are over anyway.

 

I agree there is a shelf-life concept in the UK - to some extent I was surprised Major lost as I never found Blair's vision that inspiring - I had a feeling they would fail to right many of the wrongs but a bit of that was due to Major acting as a buffer from people's memories of what the bitch had done.

 

I would make the point that I've always found the concept of "What will they do for me?" to be a core fault. It may be idealistic but I'd like more people to think about the common good. I know that personally I would probably be better off under a Tory govenment but as someone who didn't suffer too bad personally last time but had to witness what they did to the NE and the rest of the country, I found it painful and wouldn't want a repeat.

 

But you cant for all time hold every conservative government responsible for what a previous government did? Where would you draw the line in history?

 

Not just the Thatcher government though was it? Historically tory governments have always been about representing the affluent and priveleged, and the South of England.

 

Have you seen the make up of the present tory party? Virtually all went to private schools, and most of them not even 'normal' private schools at that. Cameron and Osbourne, obviously the most significant tories, are both Etonians ffs. What on Earth makes you think this particular blue leopard will change its spots? Because they have a tree drawn by a 5 year old as their logo?

 

That argument about private education doesn't really wash with me I'm afraid Renton. Yes, both of them when to private but significant members of the Labour Party likely did the same. And as for the blue leopard not changing its spots, are you forgetting that John Major left Grammar School at 16 with only 3 'O' Levels?

 

They went to Eton Craig, not any normal public school. It's a matter of degree as well - yes some Labour MPs went to private schools but the proportion is much less than it is for the tories. John Mayor is irrelevant, two Etonians carry the tory torch tree now, they're reverting back to type. You'd have been better citing Thatcher actually, she wasn't especially privileged, I'll give her that.

 

Why? Because he doesn't fit into your model?

 

From a neutral perspective your view appears to be very biggotted.

 

No, because he isn't standing as PM this election?

 

You haven't got a neutral perspective any more than I do btw.

[Christmas Tree 4835]

I just did

 

the tories introduce the pension, unemployment benefit

 

So what was Lloyd George's contribution?

 

 

Karma Chameleon

[Christmas Tree 4835]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

 

It will say something about the electorate

[NJS 4411]

Lloyd George:

 

Although old-age pensions had already been introduced by Asquith as Chancellor, Lloyd George was largely responsible for the introduction of state financial support for the sick and infirm (known colloquially as "going on the Lloyd George" for decades afterwards) — legislation often referred to as the Liberal reforms.

 

1909 he introduced his famous budget imposing increased taxes on luxuries, liquor, tobacco, incomes, and land, so that money could be made available for the new welfare programs as well as new battleships. The nation's landowners (well represented in the House of Lords) were intensely angry at the new taxes. In the House of Commons Lloyd George gave a brilliant defense of the budget, which was attacked by the Conservatives. On the stump, most famously in his Limehouse speech, he denounced the Conservatives and the wealthy classes with all his very considerable oratorical power. The budget passed the Commons, but was defeated by the Conservative majority in the House of Lords. The elections of 1910 upheld the Liberal government and the budget finally passed the Lords. Subsequently, the Parliament Bill for social reform and Irish Home Rule, which Lloyd George strongly supported, was passed and the veto power of the House of Lords was greatly curtailed. In 1911 Lloyd George succeeded in putting through Parliament his National Insurance Act, making provision for sickness and invalidism, and this was followed by his Unemployment Insurance Act. These social reforms began in Britain the creation of a welfare state and fulfilled in both countries the aim of dampening down the demands of the growing working class for rather more radical solutions to their impoverishment.[3]

 

Asquith was a liberal too btw.

[Renton 22003]

The idea of a hung parliament/coalition appeals to me on the one hand as I like the idea of a collaborative consensus drawing from a few sides of any debate. The argument against that has always been it restricts a government with a firm progressive mandate which is true but I think those days are over anyway.

 

I agree there is a shelf-life concept in the UK - to some extent I was surprised Major lost as I never found Blair's vision that inspiring - I had a feeling they would fail to right many of the wrongs but a bit of that was due to Major acting as a buffer from people's memories of what the bitch had done.

 

I would make the point that I've always found the concept of "What will they do for me?" to be a core fault. It may be idealistic but I'd like more people to think about the common good. I know that personally I would probably be better off under a Tory govenment but as someone who didn't suffer too bad personally last time but had to witness what they did to the NE and the rest of the country, I found it painful and wouldn't want a repeat.

 

But you cant for all time hold every conservative government responsible for what a previous government did? Where would you draw the line in history?

 

Not just the Thatcher government though was it? Historically tory governments have always been about representing the affluent and priveleged, and the South of England.

 

Have you seen the make up of the present tory party? Virtually all went to private schools, and most of them not even 'normal' private schools at that. Cameron and Osbourne, obviously the most significant tories, are both Etonians ffs. What on Earth makes you think this particular blue leopard will change its spots? Because they have a tree drawn by a 5 year old as their logo?

 

 

While not a great political historian, I am quite confident your comments have little truth or sense behind them.

 

Others will be more informed on the subject but didnt the tories introduce the pension, unemployment benefit and carry out massive social housing and school building programs in the pre second world ward days? Hardly representing the affluent!!!

 

I am sure there are plenty of other great achievements by Tory governments.

 

And as for having a go at potential leaders of the country for going to a very good school!!!!! Would you rather they went to Bensham comp?

 

Were the tories ever responsible for the things you mention? I don't honestly know, hopefully someone else does, but its telling you have to go back over 70 years to name any examples of how they have benefitted 'the common man'. They were resolutely against the foundation of the NHS though, I know that much. More fundamentally they obviously do not have socialist values by definition.

 

I'd rather have a leader based on merit, not privilege, wherever they're from. A person from Bensham has as much right to lead this country as one of those silver-spooned nobheads imo.

 

 

Tell that to all the commen folk who now own their council house.

 

Nice to know Thatcher's bribe still has sway with people. Pity it has resulted in a housing crisis for so many people though, who now can't afford to buy their own property but can't find decent accomodation to rent. This is all part of the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude which has plagued our society since the 80s imo.

 

Don't you think the sitting government have had plenty of opportunity to address that issue? We were, after all in a position of economic 'grandeur' at the turn of the century.

 

I think the selling off of council stock and the stigmatising attitude it introduced are irreversible unfortunately.

[Renton 22003]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

 

Yes, but what's your point? Do you think its an indication the tory party are the party of the priviliged or not?

[Renton 22003]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

 

It will say something about the electorate

 

Murdoch controlled sheep.

 

Anyway, you've already moaned about the shortcomings of our democracy in earlier posts.

[Craig 6700]

You haven't got a neutral perspective any more than I do btw.

 

I'm neither pro-Tory, anti-Labour or vice versa so therefore I must be

[Craig 6700]

The idea of a hung parliament/coalition appeals to me on the one hand as I like the idea of a collaborative consensus drawing from a few sides of any debate. The argument against that has always been it restricts a government with a firm progressive mandate which is true but I think those days are over anyway.

 

I agree there is a shelf-life concept in the UK - to some extent I was surprised Major lost as I never found Blair's vision that inspiring - I had a feeling they would fail to right many of the wrongs but a bit of that was due to Major acting as a buffer from people's memories of what the bitch had done.

 

I would make the point that I've always found the concept of "What will they do for me?" to be a core fault. It may be idealistic but I'd like more people to think about the common good. I know that personally I would probably be better off under a Tory govenment but as someone who didn't suffer too bad personally last time but had to witness what they did to the NE and the rest of the country, I found it painful and wouldn't want a repeat.

 

But you cant for all time hold every conservative government responsible for what a previous government did? Where would you draw the line in history?

 

Not just the Thatcher government though was it? Historically tory governments have always been about representing the affluent and priveleged, and the South of England.

 

Have you seen the make up of the present tory party? Virtually all went to private schools, and most of them not even 'normal' private schools at that. Cameron and Osbourne, obviously the most significant tories, are both Etonians ffs. What on Earth makes you think this particular blue leopard will change its spots? Because they have a tree drawn by a 5 year old as their logo?

 

 

While not a great political historian, I am quite confident your comments have little truth or sense behind them.

 

Others will be more informed on the subject but didnt the tories introduce the pension, unemployment benefit and carry out massive social housing and school building programs in the pre second world ward days? Hardly representing the affluent!!!

 

I am sure there are plenty of other great achievements by Tory governments.

 

And as for having a go at potential leaders of the country for going to a very good school!!!!! Would you rather they went to Bensham comp?

 

Were the tories ever responsible for the things you mention? I don't honestly know, hopefully someone else does, but its telling you have to go back over 70 years to name any examples of how they have benefitted 'the common man'. They were resolutely against the foundation of the NHS though, I know that much. More fundamentally they obviously do not have socialist values by definition.

 

I'd rather have a leader based on merit, not privilege, wherever they're from. A person from Bensham has as much right to lead this country as one of those silver-spooned nobheads imo.

 

 

Tell that to all the commen folk who now own their council house.

 

Nice to know Thatcher's bribe still has sway with people. Pity it has resulted in a housing crisis for so many people though, who now can't afford to buy their own property but can't find decent accomodation to rent. This is all part of the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude which has plagued our society since the 80s imo.

 

Don't you think the sitting government have had plenty of opportunity to address that issue? We were, after all in a position of economic 'grandeur' at the turn of the century.

 

I think the selling off of council stock and the stigmatising attitude it introduced are irreversible unfortunately.

 

That's opinion and conveniently brings an end to the debate IMO. If the housing crisis had appeared higher on Labour's policies then it need not have been 'irreversible'.

[Renton 22003]

You haven't got a neutral perspective any more than I do btw.

 

I'm neither pro-Tory, anti-Labour or vice versa so therefore I must be

 

Sorry, in my flurry of posts I thought I was directing that at CT.

[NJS 4411]

Don't you think the sitting government have had plenty of opportunity to address that issue? We were, after all in a position of economic 'grandeur' at the turn of the century.

 

I read an article about a year ago I think which described a canvasser asking people in Pennywell (I know) what the government had done for them and getting the reply "absolutely nothing". They were then asked who had paid for the entire estate's housing stock to be refurbished and the reply was "the council". When asked where the council had got the money they didn't know - 3 guesses where it had come from.

 

I'm not saying they have addressed the issue as I'd like but I think its wrong to say they've done nowt.

[Craig 6700]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

 

Yes, but what's your point? Do you think its an indication the tory party are the party of the priviliged or not?

 

 

My point is that a party decides who it wants to lead them and then it's up to the electorate to decide which party runs the country. Brings me back to my opening point that we're desperately in need of electoral reform.

 

In short, Cameron & Osbourne can't 'buy' the right to run the country - it's down to its subjects to decide.

[Renton 22003]

The idea of a hung parliament/coalition appeals to me on the one hand as I like the idea of a collaborative consensus drawing from a few sides of any debate. The argument against that has always been it restricts a government with a firm progressive mandate which is true but I think those days are over anyway.

 

I agree there is a shelf-life concept in the UK - to some extent I was surprised Major lost as I never found Blair's vision that inspiring - I had a feeling they would fail to right many of the wrongs but a bit of that was due to Major acting as a buffer from people's memories of what the bitch had done.

 

I would make the point that I've always found the concept of "What will they do for me?" to be a core fault. It may be idealistic but I'd like more people to think about the common good. I know that personally I would probably be better off under a Tory govenment but as someone who didn't suffer too bad personally last time but had to witness what they did to the NE and the rest of the country, I found it painful and wouldn't want a repeat.

 

But you cant for all time hold every conservative government responsible for what a previous government did? Where would you draw the line in history?

 

Not just the Thatcher government though was it? Historically tory governments have always been about representing the affluent and priveleged, and the South of England.

 

Have you seen the make up of the present tory party? Virtually all went to private schools, and most of them not even 'normal' private schools at that. Cameron and Osbourne, obviously the most significant tories, are both Etonians ffs. What on Earth makes you think this particular blue leopard will change its spots? Because they have a tree drawn by a 5 year old as their logo?

 

 

While not a great political historian, I am quite confident your comments have little truth or sense behind them.

 

Others will be more informed on the subject but didnt the tories introduce the pension, unemployment benefit and carry out massive social housing and school building programs in the pre second world ward days? Hardly representing the affluent!!!

 

I am sure there are plenty of other great achievements by Tory governments.

 

And as for having a go at potential leaders of the country for going to a very good school!!!!! Would you rather they went to Bensham comp?

 

Were the tories ever responsible for the things you mention? I don't honestly know, hopefully someone else does, but its telling you have to go back over 70 years to name any examples of how they have benefitted 'the common man'. They were resolutely against the foundation of the NHS though, I know that much. More fundamentally they obviously do not have socialist values by definition.

 

I'd rather have a leader based on merit, not privilege, wherever they're from. A person from Bensham has as much right to lead this country as one of those silver-spooned nobheads imo.

 

 

Tell that to all the commen folk who now own their council house.

 

Nice to know Thatcher's bribe still has sway with people. Pity it has resulted in a housing crisis for so many people though, who now can't afford to buy their own property but can't find decent accomodation to rent. This is all part of the 'I'm alright Jack' attitude which has plagued our society since the 80s imo.

 

Don't you think the sitting government have had plenty of opportunity to address that issue? We were, after all in a position of economic 'grandeur' at the turn of the century.

 

I think the selling off of council stock and the stigmatising attitude it introduced are irreversible unfortunately.

 

That's opinion and conveniently brings an end to the debate IMO. If the housing crisis had appeared higher on Labour's policies then it need not have been 'irreversible'.

 

I think the attitude it introduced is irreversible - look at all the property programs that are on TV now. We are now a nation of home owners. Whether this is a good or bad thing is a moot point, but it undeniably has a negative side.

 

Another bit of opinion - there would be even less social housing available now if the tories had stayed in power.

[Craig 6700]

Don't you think the sitting government have had plenty of opportunity to address that issue? We were, after all in a position of economic 'grandeur' at the turn of the century.

 

I read an article about a year ago I think which described a canvasser asking people in Pennywell (I know) what the government had done for them and getting the reply "absolutely nothing". They were then asked who had paid for the entire estate's housing stock to be refurbished and the reply was "the council". When asked where the council had got the money they didn't know - 3 guesses where it had come from.

 

I'm not saying they have addressed the issue as I'd like but I think its wrong to say they've done nowt.

 

I agree and I've not once said that nothing's been done. But I believe more could have been done - isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?

[Renton 22003]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

 

Yes, but what's your point? Do you think its an indication the tory party are the party of the priviliged or not?

 

 

My point is that a party decides who it wants to lead them and then it's up to the electorate to decide which party runs the country. Brings me back to my opening point that we're desperately in need of electoral reform.

 

In short, Cameron & Osbourne can't 'buy' the right to run the country - it's down to its subjects to decide.

 

Votes can of course be bought and the media can have a huge influence on elections.

 

But that's by the by - I was simply making an observation that the tory party is a party of privilege and once elected will of course look after their own. It amazes me how so many people can't see this, but there you go.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Renton

[Christmas Tree 4835]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

 

Yes, but what's your point? Do you think its an indication the tory party are the party of the priviliged or not?

 

 

I couldnt care less how the person was educated as long as they are "able" to do the job. However in this day and age I would have thought the better educated the better.

 

Perish the thought of John Prescott flying the world as leader.

[Craig 6700]

the tory party is a party of privilege and once elected will of course look after their own. It amazes me how so many people can't see this, but there you go.

 

I think we need to not lose sight of the fact that not many below the age of 40 will have been a homeowner under a Conservative government. The grass is always greener and some who feel they will be better off will undoubtedly change their minds once the power changes hands.

[NJS 4411]

I couldnt care less how the person was educated as long as they are "able" to do the job. However in this day and age I would have thought the better educated the better.

 

It's the background that paid for the education that matters to me. The Tories come from inherited wealth which as I've said before is the root cause of what's still wrong with the UK.

[Renton 22003]

As for you last paragraph - couldn't agree more but surely the inverse is true too? You can't berate them an account of their private education just as you couldn't on account of someone being education at Bensham Comp.

 

If they win, will it be a coincidence that the two most powerful men in the UK will have gone to the same most expensive school in the country, or will it say something about privilege in the tory party?

 

If they win, it's down to the electorate surely?

 

Yes, but what's your point? Do you think its an indication the tory party are the party of the priviliged or not?

 

 

I couldnt care less how the person was educated as long as they are "able" to do the job. However in this day and age I would have thought the better educated the better.

 

Perish the thought of John Prescott flying the world as leader.

 

Do you seriously think going to Eton provides you with better qualities to lead the country than going to a normal school? Keeps you in touch with the average guy?

 

I've been accused as an inverted snob on this thread (with some justification) but your last comment reeks of good old school snobbery.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Renton

[NJS 4411]

Eton produced the Windsors lest we forget - ability/educational achivement are not guaranteed.

[Christmas Tree 4835]

You haven't got a neutral perspective any more than I do btw.

 

I'm neither pro-Tory, anti-Labour or vice versa so therefore I must be

 

Sorry, in my flurry of posts I thought I was directing that at CT.

 

 

You see thats where you are wrong.

 

Things I like / dislike from all parties. Was very hopeful when NEW labour got in but they never quite lived up to their promise. (Blair being Bush's poodle scuppered any real good they could have done)

 

Cameron and Osbourne dont really appeal to me but I prefer to look past the personality a bit and see what the policies are unlike some of you who will vote Labour because you always do.

 

The problem as Happy Face or Alex commented on is the absolute knats willies difference between the two parties.

 

It may be worthwhile someone chucking up some real differences between a cameron government and a Brown one. (Based on actual policies rather than "Cameron will steal your first born, brown wont" crap)

[Craig 6700]

I couldnt care less how the person was educated as long as they are "able" to do the job. However in this day and age I would have thought the better educated the better.

 

It's the background that paid for the education that matters to me. The Tories come from inherited wealth which as I've said before is the root cause of what's still wrong with the UK.

 

So inherited wealth is the issue, not Conservatism?

 

As I've stated on here previously, I'm due to inherit quite a bit when my Dad pops his clogs - not due to any money that has passed through my family, nor due to what he earned during his working life. It's all come about due to shit cirumstances of his Mam and Wife dying within 4 months of each other and life assurance paid out.

[NJS 4411]

So inherited wealth is the issue, not Conservatism?

 

Two sides of the same coin

 

As I've stated on here previously, I'm due to inherit quite a bit when my Dad pops his clogs - not due to any money that has passed through my family, nor due to what he earned during his working life. It's all come about due to shit cirumstances of his Mam and Wife dying within 4 months of each other and life assurance paid out.

 

I have subtelties within my madness - I'd feel less "venegful" about those circumstances than the pure "landed gentry/duke of westminster" type stuff.