Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Additionally, our sub forum has lots of pretty colours and a thread dedicated to posting pictures of Rachel Weisz looking sexy.

    Statement may not be true.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob :))
    Which party should I vote for? Or join? Can anyone convince me?

    I'm very new to the Commons so have practically no prior knowledge of the parties.

    My political views are mixed so I'm unsure who to vote for.

    Not the Socialist though. Sorry. I just hate communists so much...

    Labour Party, lesser of 3 evils...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    You realise, I hope, that the aim of communism and, indeed, socialism is the abolition of bourgeois structures of government? Therefore what I said stands without your ill-informed and quite incorrect spin on it.
    I have not come for what you hoped to do. I've come for what you did.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harrow.7)
    Labour Party, lesser of 3 evils...
    This is the TSR election, where we offer no less than 7 distinct brands of evil, ranging from rabid socialists who will literally steal from you to libertarians whose chief aim in government is to make themselves redundant.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    Imagine a world without money, and try to avoid it blowing your narrow mind.
    For some reason everyone lives in caves and dies of preventable diseases by about 40. Oh, wait, that's because we did that, and then, when we invented money, Civilisation sort of happened.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    I have not come for what you hoped to do. I've come for what you did.
    Ah yes, the Libertarian claim to innocence.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tim Mc.)
    Lower tuition fees! with this being the student room, i think people can agree with me here
    I'll pitch in and say this is a key policy for the Socialist Party
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    This is the TSR election, where we offer no less than 7 distinct brands of evil, ranging from rabid socialists who will literally steal from you to libertarians whose chief aim in government is to make themselves redundant.
    There is 8 brands of evil. TehFrance is standing this time.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Ah yes, the Libertarian claim to innocence.
    We have not stolen from private citizens. We did not rob 18 million pensioners. We did not make a mockery of our nation's commitment to human rights for the sake of an impractical and ineffective ideology.

    Of those crimes, we stand innocent, while the previous government is assuredly guilty as charged.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    There is 8 brands of evil. TehFrance is standing this time.
    I doubt his manifesto represents his actual policies, so I omitted it as a possibility.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nixonsjellybeans)
    I'll pitch in and say this is a key policy for the Socialist Party
    With all the other parties, I'd ask how this would be paid for, but the Socialists don't pay for things so it's a moot point.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    We have not stolen from private citizens. We did not rob 18 million pensioners. We did not make a mockery of our nation's commitment to human rights for the sake of an impractical and ineffective ideology.

    Of those crimes, we stand innocent, while the previous government is assuredly guilty as charged.
    Yeah, that's a fine rhetorical flush as far as it goes, but we both know the conversation wasn't at all about the TSR government.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    With all the other parties, I'd ask how this would be paid for, but the Socialists don't pay for things so it's a moot point.
    Bah we list our costs like any other lot but I assume this is an attempt at a dig.

    All shall be explained when le bill is released (including costs). For now you'll have to settle for a description about the bill as shown in the manifesto.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by chrisawhitmore)
    With all the other parties, I'd ask how this would be paid for, but the Socialists don't pay for things so it's a moot point.
    It would only cost the state a few billion to provide free university tuition; we've already raised taxes enough to cover this. Additionally, the introduction of Resident's Income has rendered the maintenance loan system unnecessary - we intend to abolish this, a move which would give the state more funds available for student tuition.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    It would only cost the state a few billion to provide free university tuition; we've already raised taxes enough to cover this. Additionally, the introduction of Resident's Income has rendered the maintenance loan system unnecessary - we intend to abolish this, a move which would give the state more funds available for student tuition.
    Hopefully what it really means is that you'll provide more funding to universities - particularly in the much squeezed arts and humanities - so that students no longer need make a contribution (increasingly sizeable) to the costs of their education. Tuition fees are but a small slice of the overall costs of the training (not to mention resources) provided at university and it would be a shame to see that not met in order that the short-termism of "no more fees" is met.

    I've faith that you're already at this point in your planning, being a sensible party and all, but thought I'd double check!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Hopefully what it really means is that you'll provide more funding to universities - particularly in the much squeezed arts and humanities - so that students no longer need make a contribution (increasingly sizeable) to the costs of their education. Tuition fees are but a small slice of the overall costs of the training (not to mention resources) provided at university and it would be a shame to see that not met in order that the short-termism of "no more fees" is met.

    I've faith that you're already at this point in your planning, being a sensible party and all, but thought I'd double check!
    Of course, more funding would be good Its something we'll deal with. I'd know being a humanties student
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nixonsjellybeans)
    Of course, more funding would be good we'll have a look into it and might be able to squeeze it in the bill or if not then we'll do a second university education bill
    Ah, well then I take back what I said at the end of my post. Tuition fees aren't about squeezing students just for the sake of it. They're about the rebalancing of the costs of higher education away from state subsidies of universities to direct participation by the beneficiaries of higher education - the students. You cannot just remove tuition fees without leaving universities with a black hole in funding. This cannot be about such short-termist politics, it has to be about the long-term financial security of the higher education sector.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Ah, well then I take back what I said at the end of my post. Tuition fees aren't about squeezing students just for the sake of it. They're about the rebalancing of the costs of higher education away from state subsidies of universities to direct participation by the beneficiaries of higher education - the students. You cannot just remove tuition fees without leaving universities with a black hole in funding. This cannot be about such short-termist politics, it has to be about the long-term financial security of the higher education sector.
    Hey we're being sensible :lol:
    But in all seriousness its something to address, I know we cant just take the funding away and it will be properly addressed (the bill still needs work to it at this time)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nixonsjellybeans)
    Bah we list our costs like any other lot but I assume this is an attempt at a dig.

    All shall be explained when le bill is released (including costs). For now you'll have to settle for a description about the bill as shown in the manifesto.
    I'm still annoyed about the theft of £37bn of private property in the last term, largely because of the pretence that there would be no economic consequences from it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Yeah, that's a fine rhetorical flush as far as it goes, but we both know the conversation wasn't at all about the TSR government.
    Oh, sorry, I was keeping it TSR. If we want to go to the traditional ideological competition to see which group's extremists killed the most people, we can, but I don't think it really serves any purpose, especially as there's no historical example either of us can put forward that the other one won't immediately 'no true scotsman' their way out of.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.