Are the Lib Dems' policies really credible?

Kohoutek

beer_tins wrote: »

Why? We get interest on this "aid" to foreign countries.

Really? That's not the impression you get from the website.

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/About-DFID/Quick-guide-to-DFID/how-aid-is-spent/

Degenerate

rl290 wrote: »

The policy is that if the economic conditions are right, and if there are better Eurozone controls, then there would be a referendum. Certainly not going to happen for at least a decade though. Seems sensible. I am 100% against going into the Euro now, but, given that mainland Europe is our biggest market and we are mainland Europe's biggest market, one day it may be attractive. Never say never! Many changes have to happen first, and the party is committed to a referendum.

There will never be a right time to join an ill-conceived, fundamentally dysfunctional, economically suicidal currency union.

beer_tins

Kohoutek wrote: »

Really? That's not the impression you get from the website.

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/About-DFID/Quick-guide-to-DFID/how-aid-is-spent/

No, of course they don't give that impression, it's a government website. They say where the money that DFID looks after is spent. But nowhere do they say how much is in the form of a loan or a tied grant.

Estimates differ, but the majority of aid is in loans and tied grants.

lynzpower

beer_tins wrote: »

Regarding foreign aid, I wouldn't worry about it. People seem to think this is a hand out we simply give to developing nations. In reality, the vast majority of it is in the shape of loans (oh yes, loans are included!) and many come with conditions that the money is spent in the UK, or that the UK gets something back in return (use of land for an airforce base etc.).

Plainly, some of the other proposals don't stack up, though.

The reason this is done is to:
Stabilise nations so that they dont fall over creating a country full of asylum seekers as poverty implodes on itself and can create civil war.

It is a method of control, and like it or not, I prefer this than leaving poor nations to fend for themselves against unfair trading practices, unpayable debt and exploitation of natural resources by the "developed" world and its agents ( eg large companies that world government needs) and allowing innocent people to die in civil wars.

lynzpower

Degenerate wrote: »

There will never be a right time to join an ill-conceived, fundamentally dysfunctional, economically suicidal currency union.

Thats your opinion. As it is its an opinion I share, I used to think it was a good idea to be part of the Euro, but now, Im not sure at all.

How would you feel if there was a referendum and the people said that they wanted it?

lynzpower

Kohoutek wrote: »

One's things for sure which may effect some people on here, the Lib Dems are not the party of property!

90% reduction in CGT allowance, rate changed to same as income tax
VAT of at least 5% on new build homes
Allow councils to use a special planning category for second homes, and apply higher council tax to existing second homes
Mansion tax

Depends what you mean about being the party of "property".

Yes rules arnt weighted in favour of the "Haves"

but there are plenty of proposals in favour of the Have nots including low interest loans to bring empty properties back into use.

beer_tins

lynzpower wrote: »

The reason this is done is to:
Stabilise nations so that they dont fall over creating a country full of asylum seekers as poverty implodes on itself and can create civil war.

It is a method of control, and like it or not, I prefer this than leaving poor nations to fend for themselves against unfair trading practices, unpayable debt and exploitation of natural resources by the "developed" world and its agents ( eg large companies that world government needs) and allowing innocent people to die in civil wars.

Hey, I'm all for foreign aid. It helps improve global political stability. I was just pointing out it's not all in the form of a hand-out, as some people assume.

Kohoutek

lynzpower wrote: »

Depends what you mean about being the party of "property".

Yes rules arnt weighted in favour of the "Haves"

I know, the proposals won't effect me at the moment anyway so I'm neutral, but many of the people on this forum give the impression they are property "haves", that's why I posted it to see the reaction.

lynzpower wrote: »

Thats your opinion. As it is its an opinion I share, I used to think it was a good idea to be part of the Euro, but now, Im not sure at all.

Imagine the state we'd be in if we had not been able to use QE, and not been able to allow our currency to devalue.

lynzpower

beer_tins wrote: »

Hey, I'm all for foreign aid. It helps improve global political stability. I was just pointing out it's not all in the form of a hand-out, as some people assume.

Yeah wasnt meaning to you, there are a lot of people on this site that seem to think that giving anything to anyone is a bad idea so they ca nhave tax cuts.

Must be because this site attracts some 0of the tightest people in the UK

beer_tins

lynzpower wrote: »

Yeah wasnt meaning to you, there are a lot of people on this site that seem to think that giving anything to anyone is a bad idea so they ca nhave tax cuts.

Must be because this site attracts some 0of the tightest people in the UK

I can only agree. Surely the idea of the world's fourth richest country giving 0.7% of it's GDP to the world's poorest isn't that outrageous.

It's like a millionaire walking past a beggar and saying he can't give him any money because he "can't afford it".

The vast majority of people in this country have a roof over their heads, food on the table, electricity, runnning water, sewage & sanitation, free healthcare, free education, social security. We have one of the highest rates of internet access, computer ownership, home and car ownership. We are all comfortably amongst the very richest people on the planet. We don't know what poverty is in this country and barring an absolute disaster, we never will in our lifetimes.