The Spending Review (tackling the Socialists debt mountain)

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Of course they don't. The Marxists views defy logic, but they feed upon the ignorance of their comrades.

 

Oh give it a ****ing rest, you are so boring. Haven't you got an anti-student thread to start or something?

[rocknrollman no2]

Ordering the aircraft carriers and trying to force through new school builds during their dying days were a deliberate scorched earth policy, like a medieval army burning the fields to starve the people. I really hate Labour with a passion for many things, but this is near the top.

 

I thought the Tories agreed with the building of those aircraft carriers as well?

As for a scorched earth policy,after all these cuts the Condems will have made,there wont be any fields left to burn.

[bridge too far]

Aye, thus proving they were overpaid in the public sector FFS.

 

You're a one trick pony, aren't you

 

If they're paid more in the public sector then they're overpaid. The corolloray to this being if they got paid the same in the private sector, well that's fair

c

Instead of sniping at each other, we should all be pushing for a dignified, living wage for everybody that doesn't require the taxpayer to subsidise poorly paying employers by paying out for benefits.

 

It's not rocket science FFS

[Seaford Saint]

You're a one trick pony, aren't you

 

If they're paid more in the public sector then they're overpaid. The corolloray to this being if they got paid the same in the private sector, well that's fair

c

Instead of sniping at each other, we should all be pushing for a dignified, living wage for everybody that doesn't require the taxpayer to subsidise poorly paying employers by paying out for benefits.

 

It's not rocket science FFS

 

FFS steady Mrs BTF!!!

[bridge too far]

FFS steady Mrs BTF!!!

 

Well - *hands on hips smiley thingy*

[benjii]

You're a one trick pony, aren't you

 

If they're paid more in the public sector then they're overpaid. The corolloray to this being if they got paid the same in the private sector, well that's fair

c

Instead of sniping at each other, we should all be pushing for a dignified, living wage for everybody that doesn't require the taxpayer to subsidise poorly paying employers by paying out for benefits.

 

It's not rocket science FFS

 

I actually agree with that! Sort of.

[Thedelldays]

I thought the Tories agreed with the building of those aircraft carriers as well?

As for a scorched earth policy,after all these cuts the Condems will have made,there wont be any fields left to burn.

 

but the tories never agreed to the contract in building them..yes, they agreed we need new aircraft carriers...did they agree the terms to BAE and Thales..?

 

err, no

[Thedelldays]

And what we have at the moment is a Tory led program of exactly this, enabled by a LibDem party that has sold out on every principle they ever held and every manifesto promise they presented at the last election.

 

the labour party sold its soul to get in power

the libdems have done the same

 

has the penny not dropped that this country does not (and has not) want a liberal-socialist party in power...???

[benjii]

the labour party sold its soul to get in power

the libdems have done the same

 

has the penny not dropped that this country does not (and has not) want a liberal-socialist party in power...???

 

That's an interesting point. Particularly if "country" was taken to be "England".

[Fuengirola Saint]

I ****in hate Tories, especially working class ones, now they are cap doffing scumbags. Now that feels better!

[Whitey Grandad]

You're a one trick pony, aren't you

 

If they're paid more in the public sector then they're overpaid. The corolloray to this being if they got paid the same in the private sector, well that's fair

c

Instead of sniping at each other, we should all be pushing for a dignified, living wage for everybody that doesn't require the taxpayer to subsidise poorly paying employers by paying out for benefits.

 

It's not rocket science FFS

You're at it again. ;-). The employers are not subsidised by giving 'benefits' to some people.

[dune]

I notice that the anarchist scum were rioting yesterday. The police should have anticipated this.

[dune]

 

 

Typical workshy marxists.

[georgeweahscousin]

I ****in hate Tories, especially working class ones, now they are cap doffing scumbags. Now that feels better!

 

I bet you love champagne swilling socialists though.

 

I notice that the anarchist scum were rioting yesterday. The police should have anticipated this.

 

Anarchists protesting because the state won't pay their uni fees. You couldn't make this **** up.

 

I hope they all get criminal records. If this is the future of our country, a bunch of violent, politically immature no marks. God help us.

[dune]

I bet you love champagne swilling socialists though.

 

 

 

Anarchists protesting because the state won't pay their uni fees. You couldn't make this **** up.

 

I hope they all get criminal records. If this is the future of our country, a bunch of violent, politically immature no marks. God help us.

 

To be fair they were infiltrated by Anarchist thugs. The layabouts that turn up at G20 summits etc.

[Wade Garrett]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Anarchist idiots were set up to do Tory HQ. Nothing like that to detract from the real protest and the issue of the day.

[Atticus Finch of Maycomb]

you are all a bunch of ignorant, naive tossers

 

they couldn't possibly be protestibng about what they said they were protesting about

 

no, the march has to be infiltrated by 'anarchists'

 

what do these anarchists do, i wonder, when they are not infiltrating student riots? are they watching frasier repeats and borrowing a strimmer like the rest of us?

 

its like the 'outside agitators' and 'secondary picketing' claims during thatcher (die, *****, die) times. history repeating itself. suprise suprise with a tw*t like cameron in charge.

 

we might as well write off the next ten years of his crappy government. labour were sh*te as well, btw. I am no labour supporter.

 

but dont keep ignoring the point. or you'll never learn a f*cking thing.

 

everyone on this thread (including me) are complete c*nts.

[trousers]

Can one assume that the students who organised the protest will have had to pay for the police presence?

 

If not, one assumes these students are clever enough to realise that the public funds that paid for the police presence are funds that are no longer available to pay for the free education that they crave?

 

Clever? Hmmm....

[Atticus Finch of Maycomb]

Can one assume that the students who organised the protest will have had to pay for the police presence?

 

If not, one assumes these students are clever enough to realise that the public funds that paid for the police presence are funds that are no longer available to pay for the free education that they crave?

 

Clever? Hmmm....

 

only a complete tw*t would write that

[trousers]

you are all a bunch of ignorant, naive tossers

 

they couldn't possibly be protestibng about what they said they were protesting about

 

no, the march has to be infiltrated by 'anarchists'

 

what do these anarchists do, i wonder, when they are not infiltrating student riots? are they watching frasier repeats and borrowing a strimmer like the rest of us?

 

its like the 'outside agitators' and 'secondary picketing' claims during thatcher (die, *****, die) times. history repeating itself. suprise suprise with a tw*t like cameron in charge.

 

we might as well write off the next ten years of his crappy government. labour were sh*te as well, btw. I am no labour supporter.

 

but dont keep ignoring the point. or you'll never learn a f*cking thing.

 

everyone on this thread (including me) are complete c*nts.

 

If you're gonna get angry at lease throw a brick through someone's window. That'll learn 'em...

[trousers]

only a complete tw*t would write that

 

+ 1

[trousers]

only a complete tw*t would write that

 

I have been called worse things than a lady's vagina to be fair

Edited 11 November, 2010 by trousers

[badgerx16]

the labour party sold its soul to get in power

the libdems have done the same

 

has the penny not dropped that this country does not (and has not) want a liberal-socialist party in power...???

 

That's an interesting point. Particularly if "country" was taken to be "England".

From the Daily Heil "The Tories won a handsome 40 per cent of the vote in England

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/election/article-1274795/UK-ELECTION-RESULTS-2010-So-didnt-Tories-reach-summit.html#ixzz14xdwzR6s"

 

So the majority in England did not want the Tories.

Edited 11 November, 2010 by badgerx16

[trousers]

From the Daily Heil "The Tories won a handsome 40 per cent of the vote in England

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/election/article-1274795/UK-ELECTION-RESULTS-2010-So-didnt-Tories-reach-summit.html#ixzz14xdwzR6s"

 

So the majority in England did not want the Tories.

 

Correct.

 

The majority never vote for the party in power.

[badgerx16]

With regard to yesterday's student march - I wonder if the low level of Police presence was a 'protest' of sorts by the Met, indicating the numbers that would be available post CSR.

[georgeweahscousin]

What the majority did vote for was the removal of a completely inept government.

[georgeweahscousin]

With regard to yesterday's student march - I wonder if the low level of Police presence was a 'protest' of sorts by the Met, indicating the numbers that would be available post CSR.

 

Doesn't look like it. They have apologised for their "embarrassing" response.

[badgerx16]

With regard to student loans, tuition fees, etc; How many on here with degrees obtained them, like me, before loans & fees were introduced, and therefore were subsidised by the tax payer without having to pay anything back ? One thing above all else that p!sses me off in this debate is MPs, of any hue, journos, and other talking heads, who benefitted from the 'old way' of funding FE/HE and now spout out that graduates must pay their way because it is 'unfair' on the taxpayer.

[badgerx16]

What the majority did vote for was the removal of a completely inept government.

But there wasn't an option for a ConDem coalition, and I suspect that the vast majority of LibDem voters voted AGAINST the Conservatives as much as against the Brown regime.

[trousers]

But there wasn't an option for a ConDem coalition, and I suspect that the vast majority of LibDem voters voted AGAINST the Conservatives as much as against the Brown regime.

 

Lib Dem voters got exactly what they've been voting for for the last 60 odd years - a compromise government. Nick Clegg made it clear before the election that they would side with the party who got most votes. i.e. Common sense.

 

If lib dem voters think compromise government can somehow be selective to suit political ends rather than common sense ends then they don't get the very basic principle that they campaign for.

 

If they can't stomach compromise government or want to attach conditions to such an outcome then don't vote for it in the first place. FFS.

[trousers]

With regard to yesterday's student march - I wonder if the low level of Police presence was a 'protest' of sorts by the Met, indicating the numbers that would be available post CSR.

 

The police were in a no win situation. They would have been criticised for over-reacting or inflaming the situation in advance if they'd gone for mass cover up front.

[badgerx16]

Lib Dem voters got exactly what they've been voting for for the last 60 odd years - a compromise government. Nick Clegg made it clear before the election that they would side with the party who got most votes. i.e. Common sense.

 

If lib dem voters think compromise government can somehow be selective to suit political ends rather than common sense ends then they don't get the very basic principle that they campaign for.

 

If they can't stomach compromise government or want to attach conditions to such an outcome then don't vote for it in the first place. FFS.

 

 

I suspect that LibDem voters voted with the understanding their party would never have actually got into power.

[trousers]

I would like to take "direct action" against the purportraitors of yesterday's unrest as I disagree with their views.

 

Anyone know which windows I need to hurl bricks through?

 

It's what they would want

[trousers]

With regard to student loans, tuition fees, etc; How many on here with degrees obtained them, like me, before loans & fees were introduced, and therefore were subsidised by the tax payer without having to pay anything back ? One thing above all else that p!sses me off in this debate is MPs, of any hue, journos, and other talking heads, who benefitted from the 'old way' of funding FE/HE and now spout out that graduates must pay their way because it is 'unfair' on the taxpayer.

 

I chose not to go to university so can't really comment.

 

But what would be interesting to know is how the 'free' higher education in the past affected the public purse.

 

Were taxes overall higher to pay for it or was money diverted from other public expenditure to pay for it? Genuine question.

[buctootim]

I chose not to go to university so can't really comment.

 

But what would be interesting to know is how the 'free' higher education in the past affected the public purse.

 

Were taxes overall higher to pay for it or was money diverted from other public expenditure to pay for it? Genuine question.

 

It was paid from the public purse previously. The difference now is that when I was a student fewer than 5% of people went to university, now its around 30%. Thats a huge increase in cost, which its difficult to say should be met entirely by taxpayers.

[Thedelldays]

From the Daily Heil "The Tories won a handsome 40 per cent of the vote in England

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/election/article-1274795/UK-ELECTION-RESULTS-2010-So-didnt-Tories-reach-summit.html#ixzz14xdwzR6s"

 

So the majority in England did not want the Tories.

even LESS wanted the liberals...yeah..?

[Thedelldays]

But there wasn't an option for a ConDem coalition, and I suspect that the vast majority of LibDem voters voted AGAINST the Conservatives as much as against the Brown regime.

 

so...the liberals NEVER said they would side with the party with the most votes..?..they never indicated that then..?

no?

[solentstars]

you are all a bunch of ignorant, naive tossers

 

they couldn't possibly be protestibng about what they said they were protesting about

 

no, the march has to be infiltrated by 'anarchists'

 

what do these anarchists do, i wonder, when they are not infiltrating student riots? are they watching frasier repeats and borrowing a strimmer like the rest of us?

 

its like the 'outside agitators' and 'secondary picketing' claims during thatcher (die, *****, die) times. history repeating itself. suprise suprise with a tw*t like cameron in charge.

 

we might as well write off the next ten years of his crappy government. labour were sh*te as well, btw. I am no labour supporter.

 

but dont keep ignoring the point. or you'll never learn a f*cking thing.

 

everyone on this thread (including me) are complete c*nts.

"

i just think it shows how the same old posters and their bigoted views and what made me laugh is that "we don,t want liberal socialist governments ."but are happy to have had consertives running this country since te 80s with thatcher and blair.

[solentstars]

i wonder when the students are going to march on the consertive Labour party HQ? they are the ones who have let down the kids of working class backgrounds who are more likely now not have the chance to go university when the consertive labour party introduced tuition fees in the first place.

[Johnny Bognor]

I ****in hate Tories, especially working class ones, now they are cap doffing scumbags. Now that feels better!

 

I wouldn't sit on the fence Fuengirola, I would just shoot straight from the hip.

 

Out of interest, what is worse? A tory-saint or a communist-skate?

[franny]

With regard to student loans, tuition fees, etc; How many on here with degrees obtained them, like me, before loans & fees were introduced, and therefore were subsidised by the tax payer without having to pay anything back ? One thing above all else that p!sses me off in this debate is MPs, of any hue, journos, and other talking heads, who benefitted from the 'old way' of funding FE/HE and now spout out that graduates must pay their way because it is 'unfair' on the taxpayer.

 

I think the debate is interesting in that it was the previous Blair/Brown coalition administration who introduced the principal of fees (even though they and many members of their teams benefited from the free education before fees) but I can't remember riots against those. The biggest hurdle always is establishing the principal that a "tax" is going to be accepted (VAT, Flight Tax, Insurance Policy Tax or any other stealth tax you can think of) but after it is introduced the only issue is how high does it go. Now we are in queer street financially and need to recover a situation all hell breaks loose simply blaming the Tories/Lib Dems, very strange.

If those now bleating (the students, lecturers, "intellectuals") had not meekly accepted the initial introduction by Blair/Brown maybe the current administration would not have gone down the route?

Whilst some courses may be up to £9k per year many will not but since nothing is paid up front and recovery only starts when an earning threshold is hit I cannot see the issue. If we see a reduction in some of the nonsense degree courses as a result then I think that will also be a positive side effect. When I see the impact the huge increase in student numbers has had on Southampton High Street with the massive increase in bars/clubs/drunkenness etc. maybe if students have less cash to splash that will also be a good thing.

[solentstars]

I think the debate is interesting in that it was the previous Blair/Brown coalition administration who introduced the principal of fees (even though they and many members of their teams benefited from the free education before fees) but I can't remember riots against those. The biggest hurdle always is establishing the principal that a "tax" is going to be accepted (VAT, Flight Tax, Insurance Policy Tax or any other stealth tax you can think of) but after it is introduced the only issue is how high does it go. Now we are in queer street financially and need to recover a situation all hell breaks loose simply blaming the Tories/Lib Dems, very strange.

If those now bleating (the students, lecturers, "intellectuals") had not meekly accepted the initial introduction by Blair/Brown maybe the current administration would not have gone down the route?

Whilst some courses may be up to £9k per year many will not but since nothing is paid up front and recovery only starts when an earning threshold is hit I cannot see the issue. If we see a reduction in some of the nonsense degree courses as a result then I think that will also be a positive side effect. When I see the impact the huge increase in student numbers has had on Southampton High Street with the massive increase in bars/clubs/drunkenness etc. maybe if students have less cash to splash that will also be a good thing.

 

good post but i remember governments can back track like they did on thatchers poll tax which was a political disaster and if the students can organise their votes around the country they can have a big say in alot of elections of the next government with thir votes.

its funny when governments meet powerful groups who can throw them out of power they backtrack.

[trousers]

I suspect that LibDem voters voted with the understanding their party would never have actually got into power.

 

Nail. Head.

 

So, why can't they grasp the simple fact that the Lib Dems now have to act in accordance with being in power rather than still acting in the fantasy land of 3rd party opposition where you can say you'll do anything you like because you know you'll never get to put it into practice?

 

Either Lib Dem voters (the student subset in particular) are either very naive to believe that pre-election pledges can be carried out in shared power unconditionally or they're just not very bright.

 

Yes, the Lib Dem MPs were equally naive to make unconditional pledges in the first place but that doesn't excuse the naivity of the people that voted for them. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Edited 11 November, 2010 by trousers

[Whitey Grandad]

So the majority in England did not want the Tories.

[/color][/left]

The majority usually vote against the status quo.

[mickn]

What the majority did vote for was the removal of a completely inept government.

 

Which, thankfully, is exactly what will happen next time.

[Whitey Grandad]

Which, thankfully, is exactly what will happen next time.

 

So, what would you rather have instead? We can't posiibly survive another like the last one.

[trousers]

So, what would you rather have instead? We can't posiibly survive another like the last one.

 

I say get rid of all MPs and let the Queen and her family run their country instead of entrusting it to the people and their inept representatives.

 

Now that would save a few bob....

[Fuengirola Saint]

Now that's a question, well done! You'll have to give me time to think about that ;-)

[Johnny Bognor]

Now that's a question, well done! You'll have to give me time to think about that ;-)

 

No dilemma for me. Give me a red and white commie over a blue tory any day of the week because it is all about priorities. The skate is showing signs of logic and rational thought, but he is still a skate at the end of the day.

Edited 11 November, 2010 by Johnny Bognor

[ecuk268]

Pretty good summary of yesterday's events:

 

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/britain-backs-middle-class-children-who-want-the-moon-on-a-stick-201011103243/