The Student Room Group

Rate my political manifesto /10

• Prostitution legalised, and paid for to virgins over the age of 21 as a first go.
• Women allowed to wear what they want, however, men will be able to look as much as they want without it causing offense.
• Healthcare not provided by government to people over age of 60.
• Controls on immigration levels/only high skilled immigrants.
• Immigrants must prove they are willing to assimilate under new culture
• Weed legalised, and treated the same way as alcohol. No smoke/drive. No stoned at work etc.
• Bans on Kosher/Halal slaughter
• Religious communities will be run by the government, and paid for by taxing members of the community.
• Child benefits limited to 1 child
• Sack **** teachers from school, free up teaching time by giving students more free time to do independent work.
• Until start uni, have to pick 1 from Maths/Science to study.
• Tuition fees abolished for STEM degrees, as long as student achieves First-class grades.
• Raise tuition fees to £12,000 (UK)
• Foreign aid 0.1% of GDP.
• Decrease minimum wage by 1$/1£ to increase employment.
• TV programs that have the word "news" in it will be forced to take news out of name if providing false news (Fox)


Discuss.

Scroll to see replies

is this a joke


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Iamreallyfreya
which policy in specific is a joke and why
Reply 3
Avatar for 22.22
22.22
11
bullet points 3, 9 and 14; why?
Right, the whole child benefit for one kid, what about twins? What about foster children, would you still be given allowance for that? And surely it would lead to more kids in care, which is already too many as it is?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by 22.22
bullet points 3, 9 and 14; why?

Number 3 because people are living to ridiculous ages. Anything beyond say the age of 60 is a waste of space and priority should be given to younger people for health services.
Number 9 because peasants for some reason reproduce more than educated, richer families. It's against the natural order of things. Government shouldn't subsidise it.
Number 13 because there is honestly no difference between 9k and 12k.
Original post by Iamreallyfreya
Right, the whole child benefit for one kid, what about twins? What about foster children, would you still be given allowance for that? And surely it would lead to more kids in care, which is already too many as it is?


Posted from TSR Mobile

If children are going to end up in care, then these peasant "parents" shouldn't be having children in the first place. Poor people should be physically impaired from reproducing once they have 1 child.
If this isn't a joke then you seriously need locking up that's disgusting. People don't choose to be poor, and work their arses off to get out of poverty, and right wing idiots like you say things like that.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Tuition fees abolished for STEM degrees, as long as student achieves First-class grades.

I wonder if there is something in this for all degrees to encourage high attainment, eg the top 5% upon graduation would have their tuition fee loans redeemed by the government in a 'scholar tax'.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 9
Avatar for Arkasia
Arkasia
19
10/10. You got some really good reactions from people like freya.
Original post by Iamreallyfreya
If this isn't a joke then you seriously need locking up that's disgusting. People don't choose to be poor, and work their arses off to get out of poverty, and right wing idiots like you say things like that.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Haha. Someone needs locking because they have an opinion. I think you're mentally ill.
Original post by Birkenhead
I wonder if there is something in this for all degrees to encourage high attainment, eg the top 5% upon graduation would have their tuition fee loans redeemed by the government in a 'scholar tax'.
There is an argument.
Reply 12
Avatar for 22.22
22.22
11
Original post by CrapDunGoofed
Number 3 because people are living to ridiculous ages. Anything beyond say the age of 60 is a waste of space and priority should be given to younger people for health services.
Number 9 because peasants for some reason reproduce more than educated, richer families. It's against the natural order of things. Government shouldn't subsidise it.
Number 13 because there is honestly no difference between 9k and 12k.


Why is someone at 59 more valuable in your eyes to someone of 61? Will your policy create a huge drop in demand for healthcare, thus leading to unemployment rising significantly? Your policy intends to reduce the natural lifespan of people- why is that good?

So you'd rather indirectly have the government reduce the amount of people born into poor families? Why are 'peasants' inherently worse than 'richer families'? If there were less 'peasants' who would do the 'peasants' jobs?

Number 14 I said not 13- the one about foreign aid
Original post by 22.22
Why is someone at 59 more valuable in your eyes to someone of 61? Will your policy create a huge drop in demand for healthcare, thus leading to unemployment rising significantly? Your policy intends to reduce the natural lifespan of people- why is that good?

So you'd rather indirectly have the government reduce the amount of people born into poor families? Why are 'peasants' inherently worse than 'richer families'? If there were less 'peasants' who would do the 'peasants' jobs?

Number 14 I said not 13- the one about foreign aid
The argument that you can't draw a line is stupid. You'd be going on forever saying, why is 99 ok, but not 100, you understand? You set a limit, and keep your mouth shut about it.
Old people will require private healthcare.

We should cut foreign aid, especially to countries like Argentina who would only use that money to attack our islands. We also shouldn't give any foreign aid to corrupt countries or rich countries.
imo this is not a good manifesto.
Reply 15
Avatar for 22.22
22.22
11
Original post by CrapDunGoofed
The argument that you can't draw a line is stupid. You'd be going on forever saying, why is 99 ok, but not 100, you understand? You set a limit, and keep your mouth shut about it.
Old people will require private healthcare.

We should cut foreign aid, especially to countries like Argentina who would only use that money to attack our islands. We also shouldn't give any foreign aid to corrupt countries or rich countries.


You responded to very few of my points, try again if you like.

If an old person doesn't have the economic capacity for private healthcare what will happen?
Original post by 22.22
You responded to very few of my points, try again if you like.

If an old person doesn't have the economic capacity for private healthcare what will happen?

Why wouldn't they have the economic capacity for private healthcare? They've been working their whole life, you'd think they'd have some money saved up, surely?
Reply 17
Avatar for 22.22
22.22
11
Original post by CrapDunGoofed
Why wouldn't they have the economic capacity for private healthcare? They've been working their whole life, you'd think they'd have some money saved up, surely?


bored now
Original post by 22.22
bored now

Ok. On your way out.
Original post by CrapDunGoofed
The argument that you can't draw a line is stupid. You'd be going on forever saying, why is 99 ok, but not 100, you understand? You set a limit, and keep your mouth shut about it.
Old people will require private healthcare.


This is so stupid it hurts. So someone who has been paying taxes throughout their life to pay for care when they retire suddenly don't get any benefit from them? What's the point in paying any taxes at all then. Let's abolish currency and trade for food with bullets and bottle caps.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you