Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

March 26th, Poll Tax Riots Round 2? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HomeoApathy92)
    Well there's a lot of hype around march 26th, with the outcome expected to exceed that of Stop the War. But hopefully unlike Stop the War it will not be a complete flop. Also, with the Royal Wedding coming up and the cuts pretty much kicking in from later this year, it is a crucial dominoe. But will it be successful?

    what do you think?
    (also people in their 50s who have been 'trouble making since their teens have vowed to me they will pretty much just go on a never ending vacation if this flops, so i'm guessing it should be a big deal?)
    Farcical. I guarantee that there will not be 2 million people at the demo.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The poll tax was a ridiculous policy, deficit reduction isn't.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I like how OP is adamant that this protest has a worthy cause yet doesn't really understand any of the reasons why they're going to be protesting. Instead they decide to reason their decision with a series of generic buzz words that they've probably heard from the media yet have made no attempt to research:

    fees benefit cuts ******* bankers corrupt politics the royal wedding etc etc
    I very much doubt OP has even understood the new tuition fees or ever heard any of the arguments that support them. I also doubt their ability to comprehend how vital bankers are to the economy and instead likes to follow the left-wing crowd and blame everything on them. Furthermore I'd be very suprised if OP understands the value of the Royal Family to the UK in terms of economical and cultural value.

    OP then comes out with statements like "disability allowance is being scrapped" yet makes completely no mention of the new Personal Independence Payments scheme which is essentially the same as DLA except aims to decrease the amount of people that keep on claiming after they have recovered and are able to work.

    In conclusion, unless OP is able to actually provide some simple analysis of specific reasons why they are protesting, its pretty obvious that they are incapable of thinking independently and will attend the protest out of sheer stupidity and ignorance.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HomeoApathy92)
    so about 50 000 i think should be there
    its guna be BIG
    So how is something 1/20th the size bigger than stop the war?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by HomeoApathy92)
    Well there's a lot of hype around march 26th, with the outcome expected to exceed that of Stop the War. But hopefully unlike Stop the War it will not be a complete flop. Also, with the Royal Wedding coming up and the cuts pretty much kicking in from later this year, it is a crucial dominoe. But will it be successful?

    what do you think?
    (also people in their 50s who have been 'trouble making since their teens have vowed to me they will pretty much just go on a never ending vacation if this flops, so i'm guessing it should be a big deal?)
    Poll tax riot number 2? Even though there is no poll tax and people are far more divided on the cuts? The only people that completely disagree with the cuts are trade unions and communists (check the UK Communist party Manifesto) Every one else has clicked on that cuts must be made.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by HomeoApathy92)
    then thats whent he main disruptions will have to begin to kick in
    protests are a start
    but at the end of the day the govt dont care about graffiti and broken windows they care about money
    this is where general strikes kick in
    also all these evens begin to educate and wake people up
    im just wondering if it will actually kick off as hoped for..
    :facepalm2: General strikes are illegal.

    You are a dolt.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Curses, I was hoping to get in before "this is a democracy, now shut the hell up" and "you don't know what you're talking about, or why you're protesting" as well as the contributors who don't seem to have noticed that this isn't being organised by the NUS and is taking place on a Saturday.

    I'm not entirely sure what the OP means by 'kicking off' but some anarchists want to stay in Hyde Park for 24 hours. (I'm seriously beginning to wonder whether these anarchists even know which country they live in. On one of the student demos a banner encouraged us not to tell 'the feds' anything. Clearly this time they think we live in a much warmer country where it doesn't rain so much...) I did read somewhere that some student groups were planning on engaging in direct action as well.

    If by 'kicking off' they mean any kind of violence then given that there are likely to be families (possibly with young children) and disabled people, as well as people like my parents who are in their fifties, it seems unlikely that any sane person would be going along looking for violence. I don't think I'd be alone in saying that anyone who does want a punch up with the coppers can do it on their own time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    :facepalm2: General strikes are illegal.

    You are a dolt.
    The unions are talking of co-ordinated strike action. that means all unions striking on the same day on various issues. its the same as a general strike in all but name. in anycase just because something is illegal doesnt mean that it means it cant happen. Did the curfew stop the egptian protestors for example? no.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    The poll tax was a ridiculous policy, deficit reduction isn't.
    The poll tax was not a ridiculous policy for rich people it was a very sensible one.

    you call it deficit reduction. what this means in concrete terms is less nurses, police, firemen, youth centres and a long list of other things. that is a ridiculous policy for the majority of the population as they relie on these services.

    The deficit can be lowered in many ways. it could be done with immediate cuts and not cuts over 4 years as the condems are suggesting - why isnt that being done? because that would be ridiculuos you don't need to pay it off that quick or in that way and that same argument stands for 1 year as good as it does for 81bn over 4 years.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    The unions are talking of co-ordinated strike action. that means all unions striking on the same day on various issues. its the same as a general strike in all but name. in anycase just because something is illegal doesnt mean that it means it cant happen. Did the curfew stop the egptian protestors for example? no.
    But it does put every employee at massive risk. even if you don't get sacked odds are you would be blacklisted. Plenty of other ways to get rid of someone than outright firing them
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Will Lucky)
    These cuts are for the benefit of everyone.
    how is losing your job a benefit? how is dying in an underfunded hospital a benefit? how is losing your youth centre a benefit?

    The cuts are benefiting some people - the rich. The richest 100 people, according to the times 100 richlist, collectivly got 77bn richer last year. That was the biggest increase since records began. They will benefit from the tax cuts and the cuts to public services ill not affect them as they will go private. In short the rich will get richer while the poor get poorer, that is what these cuts mean and its why people are demonstrating. good on them!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    But it does put every employee at massive risk. even if you don't get sacked odds are you would be blacklisted. Plenty of other ways to get rid of someone than outright firing them
    Every employee is already at risk of losing their job due to the cuts.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    Every employee is already at risk of losing their job due to the cuts.
    No not really.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by meenu89)
    Thanks for the offer though, but no thanks, I'll be working anyway, trying to earn some money.
    you wont if you loose your job.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    No not really.
    you have no way of knowing whether it is you that will be given compulsary redundancy. everyone is at risk of losing their job.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    you have no way of knowing whether it is you that will be given compulsary redundancy. everyone is at risk of losing their job.
    Again no not really. What an epic fail of logic you seem to have there.

    10 employees will be made redundant out of 100. How exactly is everyone in this situation at risk?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Again no not really. What an epic fail of logic you seem to have there.

    10 employees will be made redundant out of 100. How exactly is everyone in this situation at risk?
    because you don'tknow who the ten are going to be. If there were 100 people in the room and someone said I'm going to shoot 10 people here you would feel at risk wouldn't you! lol.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    The poll tax was not a ridiculous policy for rich people it was a very sensible one.

    you call it deficit reduction. what this means in concrete terms is less nurses, police, firemen, youth centres and a long list of other things. that is a ridiculous policy for the majority of the population as they relie on these services.

    The deficit can be lowered in many ways. it could be done with immediate cuts and not cuts over 4 years as the condems are suggesting - why isnt that being done? because that would be ridiculuos you don't need to pay it off that quick or in that way and that same argument stands for 1 year as good as it does for 81bn over 4 years.
    It doesn't neccesarily mean less nurses, police etc, it can mean less bureaucrats, managers and diversity officers. There is massive waste in the public sector and i would be cutting far more than the coalition are doing. After the cuts public spending will be back to 06/07 levels and we were hardly streamlined then either.

    The problem with delaying spending cuts is that if international investors do not beleive you have a credible defecit reduction plan, interest rates on the debt rise and then you end up wasting more money servicing the debt and either cutting spending more or increasing taxes further. Do you really want your hard earned taxes to be lining the pockets of international bond traders? I certaintly don't.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    how is losing your job a benefit? how is dying in an underfunded hospital a benefit? how is losing your youth centre a benefit?

    The cuts are benefiting some people - the rich. The richest 100 people, according to the times 100 richlist, collectivly got 77bn richer last year. That was the biggest increase since records began. They will benefit from the tax cuts and the cuts to public services ill not affect them as they will go private. In short the rich will get richer while the poor get poorer, that is what these cuts mean and its why people are demonstrating. good on them!
    People in public sector jobs are not only taking our tax money, they're also not engaged in any sort of productive work. If there are jobs to be cut, and they can be shifted into the private sector, then we essentially win twice. "Bi-winning" as the parlance of the times would have it.

    The OP here outlines the present situation well: the sort of people who get involved in these protests have no particular cause, they're just general malcontents who'll protest at any Tory government - and, it seems now, any Labour government too. They barely know why they're there - so they're hardly going to capture the public imagination.

    (Original post by badtothebone)
    The unions are talking of co-ordinated strike action. that means all unions striking on the same day on various issues. its the same as a general strike in all but name. in anycase just because something is illegal doesnt mean that it means it cant happen. Did the curfew stop the egptian protestors for example? no.
    It does mean that if people get involved in illegal strikes, they're very liable to be sacked. From a young man's perspective, this is a good thing - it frees up jobs for those of us who want to work and get on in life, and feel we can do a damn sight better than a bunch of decadent tossers who want to spend their time doing nothing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    It doesn't neccesarily mean less nurses, police etc, it can mean less bureaucrats, managers and diversity officers. There is massive waste in the public sector and i would be cutting far more than the coalition are doing. After the cuts public spending will be back to 06/07 levels and we were hardly streamlined then either.

    The problem with delaying spending cuts is that if international investors do not beleive you have a credible defecit reduction plan, interest rates on the debt rise and then you end up wasting more money servicing the debt and either cutting spending more or increasing taxes further. Do you really want your hard earned taxes to be lining the pockets of international bond traders? I certaintly don't.
    sorry but do you really beleive all that tory propaganda? are you telling me that no nurses, policemen youth centres etc are going to be cut?

    if that is you're argument against delaying spending cuts then why arnt you for implementing the full cuts to the deficit NOW rather than over 4 years... that way there is less interest being paid......hard earned taxes.....blah etc. why are u waiting for 4 years?

    I would rather keep our services - invest in them which would lead to economic growth and then pay debt off over a long period of time. this was done in WW2 when the debt was three times as high and we set up the NHS nationalised 20% of the economy built houses etc. Lets remember its not the policman who will lose his job or the youth centre that caused the debt - therefore why are they being made to pay it!
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.