Praise to the American People

System

ThumbRemote wrote: »

goater78 might have meant that, but as they are usually wrong they can safely be ignored.

The quote "Same !!!!, different face" clearly meant who cares who won, they are both pretty much the same

Ironically you are doing the exact opposite of ignoring me.

qetu1357

Azari wrote: »

No.

What we need is parties that will move the 'have nots' to 'haves' - or at least a good proportion of them.

Which is like I said looking after the "haves" AND "the have nots".

shaun_from_Africa

goater78 wrote: »

Her policies led to over a million working class families owning their own council house.

Her unpopularity rests on controversial issues like the way she treated the miners and the poll tax.

Well, if it wasn't for MT and her policies, I doubt if I would ever have ended up owning my own property as I was in a fairly low paid job at the time. By the time my wages had increased to a reasonable level, the prices of houses in the South East had rocketed so if it wasn't for the option of buying my council house, I would probably still be renting.

As to the poll tax, this is something which I never had any problems with.
Before this was introduced, I was living on my own in a small house and was paying the same rates as my neighbours (2 adults and 2 children) despite them using far more of the local services and amenities.
The poll tax basically meant that a household with 2 adults would be paying more than an identical house with single occupancy, which to me is totally fair.
I think that there should have been more allowances made for low income groups, but IMO, the poll tax itself was a good idea badly set up.

System

Was not the issue that a person living on their own in a big house would be paying less than a family of 4 in a small terrace. It was seen as a tax on the poor. I think council tax is fairer. The more your house is worth the more you pay.

thatlemming

You do realise that black people have pretty much always universally voted democrat, even when it wasn't obama running for president? ...not really racist after all maybe.

shaun_from_Africa

goater78 wrote: »

Was not the issue that a person living on their own in a big house would be paying less than a family of 4 in a small terrace. It was seen as a tax on the poor. I think council tax is fairer. The more your house is worth the more you pay.

But despite the house being worth more, a large expensive house with one occupant would in all probability be using less local services and amenities (which is what the poll tax was intended to fund) than a smaller house with 4 or 5 occupants.

IMO, an occupancy based charge system combined with a satisfactory discount system for low earners would be the best of both worlds.

dacouch

goater78 wrote: »

Yes I believe that Romney got the White male vote while Obama got the women, black and latino vote.

What I didn't realise until last night was apparently by 2020 the majority minority race in the USA will be Latino. No race will have greater than 50% but the biggest one will be Latino. If the republicans don't find a way of reaching out to the latino base then they won't get back in for a long time.

Interestingly there is alot of talk that the next republican candidate will be Jeb Bush. While the democrat one may be Hilary. That would be an interesting election!

Romney wore amusingly heavy fake tan in September reputedly to appeal to the Latino vote.

System

dacouch wrote: »

Romney wore amusingly heavy fake tan in September reputedly to appeal to the Latino vote.

They should have brought Jimmy Smitts in as candidate. The first Latino president of the USA

System

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

But despite the house being worth more, a large expensive house with one occupant would in all probability be using less local services and amenities (which is what the poll tax was intended to fund) than a smaller house with 4 or 5 occupants.

IMO, an occupancy based charge system combined with a satisfactory discount system for low earners would be the best of both worlds.

Yes although thats true people with less money are never so reasonable.

Although the Poll tax was fair in principle, a tax on people is never popular. Tax payers only tend to be happy if they know people that are richer than them are paying more. With the poll tax this was never really the case.

vyle

ThumbRemote wrote: »

goater78 might have meant that, but as they are usually wrong they can safely be ignored.

The quote "Same !!!!, different face" clearly meant who cares who won, they are both pretty much the same

On the plus side, Obama supports basic human rights. Romney is a bible thumping idiot who wants to send the world back to the dark ages and doesn't know why planes don't have opening windows.