Is David Cameron the worst PM ever?

No it doesn't. Let me just give a billionaire a some more money as that will help the people living in relative poverty.

Wow! That's the dumbest thing I've read in this thread yet.

Well think, where does all this extra money the rich now have go? Straight back into the economy and into the hands of the poor.

LOL - but who did Labour "borrow" from??? Who is paying it back?

Labour borrow from you, your kids and grandkids causing inflationary prices - so people are actually worse off - they have more "money" - but can only spend it on consumer items or holidays - if they do get a house - they end up in negative equity when the bubble burts!! We are now paying back all of Labour's borrowing!!!

-

VAT increase is the only way to increase the tax take in a recession - trying to hit the "rich" just means they find ways to dodge the tax - wouldn't you if you were paying a 50% tax rate? Go crazy on the rich- and they MOVE ABROAD - TONY BLAIR'S BUSINESSES ARE REGISTERED IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS TO AVOID UK TAX - THIS IS A FACT!!

Several companies are restructuring, cutting jobs and re-locating to tax-benign countries - Boots plc has moved to Switzerland - losing us over £100 million a year and stopping any UK pharmacist competing - to claw that money back we must raise VAT so Boots don't take it out!! Foreign owned companies can't avoid VAT.

-

"Being socially responsible" is not giving everyone A* at school and creating courses in film studies and cooking to cause grade inflation, meaning young people then sign up to £30k debt to "prove" they are good enough for an internship!

"being socially responsible" is not de-regulating lending so anyone can get a self-cert mortgage - driving house prices so high investors pile in - instead of putting money into the stock market and supoprting BRitish business growth - and first-time buyers are shut out the market

"being socially responsible" is not creating non-jobs and non-qualifications to massage unemployment figures leading to a huge skills gap in core professions requiring record immigration.

"being socially responsible" is being an adult - sorry you are too poor to have kids, sorry you need to get a real qualification before we can trust you will make the repayments to buy a house. No - you need to invest in british businesses not buy-to-let sarah beeny madness if you don't want us to tax you heavily.

"being socially responsible" is not trying to con young people into thinking they know how everything works to win votes by claiming it was "down to the banks".


YES IT WAS DOWN TO THE BANKS - but why? Because bonds that were actually sub-prime mortgages (only existing because govrnments underwrote them) defaulted....

Banks lobbied for de-regulation in the mortgage market, Labour and US govt allowed it and encouraged it - as more tax money came in, in the short term and they got backhanders (yes really)

When the mortgages failed - taxpayers bailed out the banks.

think about that a minute:

1. Labour deregulated mortgages/banking to allow banks to profit based on taxpayer-underwritten borrowing

2. Now its blown up the taxpayer foots the bill and Tories are voted in to to stop the country going bankrupt.

How on earth is this Labour looking after "everyone" and the tories looking after the "rich"??

Well think, where does all this extra money the rich now have go? Straight back into the economy and into the hands of the poor.

Considering the poor economic climate, and when compared with previous PMs, I think he's done an okay job so far. Nothing outstanding but he hasn't dropped the ball yet. So no, he is not the worst PM ever you idiot.

Like you said you shouldn't take it as the gospel truth.

My point is you cannot say whether EMA improved their grades or not because you cannot compare like for like and just changing whether they get EMA or not.

Stop assuming people who study hairdressing live next to the school, study soft subjects (which is subjective), and wastes money each weekend.
Even if the student goes to university there is no guarantee they will graduate and get a job, so there is no guarantee they will pay taxes in the future and pay back the subsidy.

You're funny when you try to sound smart. Your post is slightly more eloquent than your previous one but still lacking in substance

So I suppose you don't think we should slavery remembrance days?

Of course morality is subjective but it has nothing to do with what people saw as right and just. It was the law. Which was enforced by the ruling class as it always has been. Do you think that most women thought they shouldn't be allowed to vote? Please at least try to use your brain for a second.

Also the term 'Holocaust' is of Greek origin meaning "sacrifice by fire". It is NOT a "Judeo-Christian" term.

Again you're attacking the manner in which I'm arguing not the content of my argument.

But anyways isn't about time you did your homework?

And try to pay a little more attention in class the semester. You might actually learn something!

Run along now.

That patronising tone is meant to achieve what? This is an internet forum for constructive debate, all you have presented are childish digs and grossly misrepresented or outright fabricated evidence. You are 25 years old and from what has been shown so far, possess an argument structure more akin to that of a disgruntled ape, shout and fling poo at it until it goes away.



Ironic that you deigned to talk about 'eloquence' and then construct a sentence that doesn't make sense. What history can teach us is how to avoid the mistakes of the past, slavery was a 'mistake' in terms of morality and one that can be avoided in the future.



Hmm, well lets have a think about that shall we? Alot of women were under the impression that they couldn't vote, yes, but the patriarchal concept of society at the time included the fact that women simply weren't responsible enough/intelligent enough to vote; people actually bought that because they themselves thought they had made a rational decision to come to that. Nobody makes a decision and goes 'Herp well I am being told it therefore it is true', the process is subtler than that.
Slavery wasn't compulsory by law, what on earth are you talking about? Thousands of Greek families had slaves, they weren't necessarily rulers either, middle class would be a better term to describe them. Hell, even some of the worst off Greek Citizens would have a slave. Then you have the Spartans who simply went and conquered another country and based their entire lifestyle around the fact they had a massive amount of controlled labour to use, EVERY SPARTAN was part of that, and if you know anything about the Spartan hierarchy, their 'ruling elite' was not very elite (they referred to each other as 'the equals'). I'd even argue that it is one of the more sounder examples of a truly communistic society, even if ironically, it is built upon the backs of others. Greece never had a centralised government strong enough to impose true 'slave laws' nationwide, it was decided by the people, who thought they were doing the moral thing at the time.

Do you honestly believe an elected government can do whatever it likes? A government is reflective of the society that elects it, not the other way around.



This point you have got true, and I should rephrase that what I mean is that it is the JEWS who christened it the Holocaust, a name to describe the damage done to them.


I still want a link by the way to your British empire genocide figures.

Because the tories are cutting benefits which help the poorest and most desperate people in society. Labour DID NOT do this. Tony Blair was a scumbag and a war criminal and the Labour party is filled with liars and hypocrites. We all agree on this.

But do you think that the conservatives wouldn't have deregulated the mortgage market? Of course they would have! Do you think DC wouldn't have bailed out the banks? Of course he would have!

I actually agree with most of what you say mate. I am certainly not a fan of Labour as I've said before. Perhaps I didn't express myself well enough: when I said they were more socially responsible I meant 'idealogically'. My main contention is that the tories would rather cut back on benefits that help society rather than curtail our military budget (ie sending our flagship destroyer to the falklands etc...) or increase taxes on the rich.

Well I'm sorry if you don't like my tone but you're the one who began by quoting memes and telling me to shut up. Now you want to talk about 'constructive debate'? Please... Everyone can see that you're just backing down after I humiliated you and all the right-wingers utterly and completely.

Cool beans brah is not a meme. How can I be backing down if I wrote out several paragraphs in response to you? Surely backing down involves actually conceding the argument?

Show me one example where I outright fabricated evidence? Just ONE example. I dare you.

29 million deaths as a direct result of British occupation in India for starters.

I do agree with you that governments are reflective of society...

Then all this ruling elite bs is nonsense.

But riddle me this all you Cameron/tory supporters: did we have riots under the previous labour govt?

What does that tell you about our society?

That we have a minority of inconsiderate tosspots who basically were 10% actual political demonstrators and 90% opportunist thugs give or take. (A made up figure, but it is true that atleast a substantial minority of the protestors were opportunistic, people who want to make a political statement don't steal TVs).

Is David Cameron the worst PM ever?

A lot of my fellow lefties would argue that Thatcher would be a more appropriate recipient of this title. However, I disagree. At least Thatcher stood for something. She had principles. Even Hitler and Stalin had principles. David Cameron has no principles. He is an empty vacuous suit with no ideas of his own or convictions of any kind. He is by far the most sycophantic, shapeshifting politician I've ever seen and that's saying a lot. He's been caught lying and changing his story on virtually every single topic he's discussed from economics, to healthcare, to social issues, to foreign policy, etc... Even his own party have criticized him for this.

David Cameron has dedicated his life to wealth and power; to make the rich richer by stealing from the poor. He is a complete corporate tool. Almost every single policy he's implemented has been for the benefit of the rich and the corporations and to the detriment of the poor and the middle class.

Verdict: Worst PM EVER!

Discuss.