The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 440
Original post by badcheesecrispy
No mate, clearly you barely ever smoke so know nothing much about weed and whitey off a bucket. Its nout to be ashamed of :smile:


Nah your buying ground basil.

47064_275.jpg

Shouldn't look like that mate sorry but your getting ripped off.
Reply 441
Thank you someone who lives in the real world.
People vote Labour because they are fed up of the austerity measures of this government. They are fed up watching the rich tax avoiding whilst jobs are being taken away from the average man.
Again, I ask how do you know how everyone in your school spends their money?
Original post by pr0view
Nah your buying ground basil.

47064_275.jpg

Shouldn't look like that mate sorry but your getting ripped off.


nah, i smoke a lot, get it free of my brother mostly or very cheap. Your just a lightweight. £30 worth maybe good for a friday night smoke but if you are referring to a pothead spending all their ema on bud it isnt enough for a week.

anyway back on topic...
Reply 445
Original post by Forget that
Oh sorry i thought you were talking about the mayor ones :colondollar:, for the other ones FPTP then yeah i completely agree. I hate both FPTP and AV, but im just really fussy i suppose :tongue:


Wish I could have voted in the mayor ones, first choice would have been Jenny , second choice Ken :tongue:. It'd be great if the general elections were like that.
Original post by That Bearded Man
Jeez this is quite patronising, so much to say, yet I'll stick to, coal mining isn't a proper job to you?

Where did I say it's not a proper job?

I said its not a job for life- as in, dont leave school and snub qualifications, aged 14, to do it....
Original post by pr0view
Thank you someone who lives in the real world.


As I've said, this is probably well off middle class college boys who think theyre bad having a spliff behind campus. Which is why I advocated getting rid of it except for those from properly poor families. 30k a year isnt poor, and even then these people would only get a tenner
Reply 448
Original post by badcheesecrispy
nah, i smoke a lot, get it free of my brother mostly or very cheap. Your just a lightweight. £30 worth maybe good for a friday night smoke but if you are referring to a pothead spending all their ema on bud it isnt enough for a week.

anyway back on topic...


Lmao i haven't touched a joint in roughly 9 months and ****ing glad of it because i used to smoke far too much.
Reply 449
Original post by badcheesecrispy
As I've said, this is probably well off middle class college boys who think theyre bad having a spliff behind campus. Which is why I advocated getting rid of it except for those from properly poor families. 30k a year isnt poor, and even then these people would only get a tenner


College boy in a council house yeah **** off patronising ****
Original post by That Bearded Man
What's your point? The SDLP is a superior choice than any other nationalists party, also the Tories had a deal with UUP pre-election?


SDLP = against N Ireland being part of Britain
UUP = for N Ireland being part of Britain

It doesnt look good when a party who are against the United Kingdom following the whip of the party who were in Government of the United Kingdom!
Original post by djj
(as the saying goes left wing politics is for the heart, right wing politics is for the brain) .

So you do admit lefties are naive and devoid of reality and "righties" are smart/sensible?


Original post by djj
Labour is the party of the NHS and looking after the unfortunate people.

No it's not. Its the party for failures.


Original post by djj
Also people seem to forget the heritage of the labour party and the grass roots of the party, it's not scroungers it's hard working , working class people who seek protection. I would dare say by and large the "benefit scroungers" are Apolitical.
People need a reality check

Back in the 18th century when the evil aristocracy ruled the tories- yes. Nowadays the tories are more middle class, more grammar school than eton. Therefore the only people who the tories dont represent are the underclass. Guess who Labour present? Underclass, pensioners (the ones who spent all of their money), immigrants and disabled people.


Original post by djj

Who is getting punished by this Tory led government
Nurses
teachers
Social workers

Please please please tell me you are being purposely stupid?

You are, surely? It's a joke yes? You arent really saying all this and not understand whats happened?

LABOUR-SPENT-MONEY-WE-DIDNT-HAVE-HIRING-TOO-MANY-PUBLIC-SECTOR-WORKERS

THESE-PEOPLE-SHOULD-NEVER-HAVE-BEEN-HIRED-IN-THE-FIRST-PLACE-BECAUSE-IT-WAS-UNSUSTAINABLE

TO-CUT-THE-DEFICIT-THE-JOBS-WHICH-SHOULD-NOT-HAVE-BEEN-CREATED-IN-THE-PUBLIC-SECTOR-NEED-TO-BE-CUT


Get it????????

(Apologies for the capital letters, but it's seriously starting to look like there are a lot of stupid Labour sympathisers)
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 452
I think its more due to the fact that there isn't really a suitable alternative, think about it, in Britain we only really have the two parties of Labour and Tories and they both have pros and cons, obviously no one party will ever be able to solve everything. I would say, and this is just my opinion, that labour seem to actually care more about helping those who need the help such as those in poverty and with bad resources, than the tories. I think for those families they need the help now which is what labour offers instead of the tories plan that lowering spending will eventually help the economy in 10 or whatever years time. Some people just don't have the time to wait to be able to feed their kids etc. Although this may seem selfish and what not you have to remember that it is the persons individual vote and everyone has different needs.
Original post by Bornblue
People vote Labour because they are fed up of the austerity measures of this government.

Well generally, when one overspends on their credit card they have to...


Original post by Bornblue
They are fed up watching the rich tax avoiding

Well would you want your money being spent on some of the scum Labour support? I know I wouldnt want my hard earnt money going to half of the homes in Glasgow and Rotherham!

Original post by Bornblue
whilst jobs are being taken away from the average man.

Don't be average then??? And also don't vote in a Labour Government who bankrupts the country!

That's the only enjoyable thing about "ordinary folk" losing their jobs- it's their beloved Labour party who caused the job losses, albeit via a time-lag :wink:
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by sarah-lo
I think its more due to the fact that there isn't really a suitable alternative, think about it, in Britain we only really have the two parties of Labour and Tories and they both have pros and cons, obviously no one party will ever be able to solve everything. I would say, and this is just my opinion, that labour seem to actually care more about helping those who need the help such as those in poverty and with bad resources, than the tories. I think for those families they need the help now which is what labour offers instead of the tories plan that lowering spending will eventually help the economy in 10 or whatever years time. Some people just don't have the time to wait to be able to feed their kids etc. Although this may seem selfish and what not you have to remember that it is the persons individual vote and everyone has different needs.

No the difference is, the people who Labour support are short termists. They are given £100 and by the next day they have spent £70 of it. Give a tory £100 and they will invest £40 for a rainy day and still have £60 the next day.

Labour support short-termism, they do not support responsibility, they support messing about at school and you will still be ok. This is completely wrong, there is no incentive to do well under Labour, because those who do bugger all are as comfortable (sometimes more comfortable) than those genuinely hard working people in lower-paid jobs.
Reply 455
The fact is that there is perhaps a cigarette paper separating the Conservatives and Labour at the current time, this having been the case for about the last 40 years, and if, billydisco, you think anything different, as your posts seem to vociferously imply, you are an ignoramus.
Original post by That Bearded Man
Some good points here,

Firstly, deficit is surely irrelevant, this is what the Tories plan was. I'd be very surprised if it was higher, I'm no economist, but surely some facts are misleading?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/9241554/Government-borrowing-will-rise-in-2012-despite-18bn-austerity-plan-says-CBI.html

http://www.ftadviser.com/2012/05/04/investments/economic-indicators/uk-gdp-is-less-than-pre-crisis-niesr-MxKJH10OQa42KVY8YBPrdJ/article.html

And, considering the royal wedding, there always was going to be a boost to the economy here anyway.

As for Thatcher's policies, economically she suited the corporations and so by growing them I can see why it's deemed she performed an "economic miracle." However socially, she lengthened the divide between the rich and the poor, she weakened the unions and under-funded infrastructure, also her "buy your own council house" surely was a big loss?

I firmly believe that growth is the key to economic recovery, growth which it seems this government are avoiding at all costs.

Oh and by students, I accept the rise in tuition fees because as you say the repay system is fair enough. I'm talking about the removal of the EMA (it should still be donated to the most needy) and the pay freeze for the workers aged between 18-25, as opposed to other ages.

Thatcher's effect on poverty was profound, obviously this is of little concern to you, but it is to me.

No doubt the expensive scandal highlights the corruption in both camps, however thieving billionaires refers to say, http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2012/04/17/conservative-peer-hired-as-tax-haven-lobbyist/

Also, I believe wealth should be distributed on need, therefore giving the rich a tax break, in a gamble that they will stay here, is money given to them, thus thieving. Also look at how some Tory MP's received funding from, say, A4E and private healthcare firms.

Oh and discussing family values makes me selfish does it? I had know idea economics was the only purpose of a government


Finally a discussion with the opposite side that isn't retarded, thank you!!! I'm not being sarcastic, you have done me a great service :P ,

Yes I agree some facts are misleading but I basically scoured the internet and found the ones which seemed to match up the most, I'll try and find the links :smile: but it definitely is within that region!

Yes that is a good point, however it surely wasn't by such a large percentage as to be noticeable? On top of this, surely a right wing (capitalist) party would be better at exploiting the most out of events like these in terms of economic gain, I believe DC visited china etc a lot around that time , and probably made Britain a lot more money?(not fact just an idea)

Onto thatcher..again, your point on undermining unions was her plan, like her I believe they have too much power and at the moment aren't a good idea. I like the fact they stand up for workers rights, minimum pay...but at the moment they take the piss. I must say that while we have the NHS and public schooling I care little for the bridges between rich and poor, I'm sorry it's just my way of thinking, I'm only middle class as well, but personally with how many luxuries our country has, it just doesn't appear to be a problem... If we were american then yes.

I don't see growth being stunted by the Tories, they did offer quite a large sum to banks to start loaning out money, but you can hardly blame them for being cautious? but yes growth is and always will be the only way out, but until the rest of Europe follows suit, we are semi powerless, unless we go back to our roots in engineering and power :/

EMA wasn't removed it's just sorted by local councils now, fair enough to the very needy, but they way it was done before in my opinion was scandalous... especially as the parents were already on benefits. Yes the pay freeze wasn't Ideal, but things had to be done to save money, and bear in mind that was only the public sector. You must also consider the younger workers are less likely to have families than older ranges and so need less income anyway, news like that to a parent could render them homeless.

I don't think it was all that great, but yes, I'm afraid as I'm not part of that era I can't fully understand the difficulty the poor went through, and can only rationalise it with what I see today.

Yup, that looks bad -_-, I won't even bother with that as I have probably lost...

I can't agree with you on the tax break part :/ they earned the money, especially if a private sector worker and have entitlement to it, considering they most likely use private schools and healthcare, it's surely stealing by giving it to the poor.


I never said that. it was simply the way you put it...

I must say the only reason we disagree is our founding beliefs on how we think society can be better and our political beliefs, so technically we are at a stalemate were further discussion would simply be petty, unless one of us drastically changed the other...which isn't going to happen on a website :L but thank you!
Original post by zaliack
Wish I could have voted in the mayor ones, first choice would have been Jenny , second choice Ken :tongue:. It'd be great if the general elections were like that.


Haha well I voted exactly that, so you know, pretend my vote was yours.
It would be amazing if the actual elections were like that, although coalitions would be quite common that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing :smile:
Original post by Edenwood
The fact is that there is perhaps a cigarette paper separating the Conservatives and Labour at the current time, this having been the case for about the last 40 years, and if, billydisco, you think anything different, as your posts seem to vociferously imply, you are an ignoramus.

Are you suggesting the tories support the underclass as much as labour do?

Also how can you talk about the last 40 years when both parties have become less left and right? They may have been similar for the last 15 years, but not the last 40!
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by scriggy
Because they're slightly less **** than the alternatives.


this, pretty much.

Latest

Trending

Trending