Cons Lost Election 2015 Already Says Telegraph

grizzly1911

DavidF wrote: »

. It also winds me up to witness the working classes fight each other over the scraps while the really rich sit back and laugh their @rses off at us.

The way I see it is we are working class. We will always pay tax, Supporting cuts to our benefits/services rights ect is like asking a turkey to vote for xmas. But unbelievably we all seem to meekly vote for/allow just that reality for us. The trick is they have conned a lot of us into thinking we are not working class.

I do wonder where middle class really starts these days. I wonder where the line is, in income and wealth, 200K+ £Multi M? I don't know, figures are a starter for ten, but I am sure there will be a statistician along shortly.

DecentLivingWage

grizzly1911 wrote: »

I do wonder where middle class really starts these days. I wonder where the line is, in income and wealth, 200K+ £Multi M? I don't know, figures are a starter for ten, but I am sure there will be a statistician along shortly.

How interesting you should say that - I was in my sisters kitchen on New Years Day having exactly that conversation with her and her husband - they are both in lowish paid prof jobs ,pay £100 pw to get to work -petrol - and they were bitter about the child benefit shambles (not voting Con next time ) We were all hoping just such a statistician WOULD come along - couldnt decide what we were, but surely as we said, raiding the paltry child benefit pot will be a drop in the ocean for the deficit? All that will happen is that families stop buying British services and goods .Osborne needs INCOME - again I entreat you all to advise us - where is his revenue going to come from?

Child Benefit Blunder
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9776979/Tax-chaos-as-child-benefit-cuts-loom.html

Moby

The_White_Horse wrote: »

yes, but all these people you will be paying privately are other peoples' children. it doesn't matter if they do it for free or if you pay them - the person wiping your backside will be someone elses child.

What is it with you...... Its not other peoples fault that you chose to have kids....just don't expect others to pay for your decision. Support them yourself!
The population explosion indicates that we need to decrease the birth rate and what we need are tax incentives to those of us who chose not to procreate and over burden public services with offspring. It needs to be done gradually obviously for the reasons you mention...but I believe increasing use of technology eg the introduction of backside wiping robots will allay your fears re. providing services from a decreasing population base.:)

Moby

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

How interesting you should say that - I was in my sisters kitchen on New Years Day having exactly that conversation with her and her husband - they are both in lowish paid prof jobs ,pay £100 pw to get to work -petrol - and they were bitter about the child benefit shambles (not voting Con next time ) We were all hoping just such a statistician WOULD come along - couldnt decide what we were, but surely as we said, raiding the paltry child benefit pot will be a drop in the ocean for the deficit? All that will happen is that families stop buying British services and goods .Osborne needs INCOME - again I entreat you all to advise us - where is his revenue going to come from?

Child Benefit Blunder
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9776979/Tax-chaos-as-child-benefit-cuts-loom.html

Did you ask your sister what she voted last time and if it was tory why exactly?....because I bet so many like her are feeling stupid and mugged off now lol!

angrypirate

Back on the topic of the telegraph thinking the Torys will lose the next GE, Dan Hodges seems to disagree
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100196361/a-conservative-win-in-2015-isnt-only-possible-right-now-its-the-most-likely-outcome/

angrypirate

And so does Daniel Hannan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100196226/everything-will-look-different-after-david-cameron-embraces-an-inout-referendum/

Both have some very good points

(No points for guessing what Im reading this morning)

John_Pierpoint

howee wrote: »

"Borrow, borrow, borrow, spend, spend, BUST!"

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

You seem to have forgotten that all through those long years of opposition the Tories promised to match or exceed Labour's spending plans.

The difference between Tory and labour spending plans, even today, is minuscule. Particularly after Osbourne has been forced into so many U Turns over spending....

The current and much revised Tory Plan A- ends up with a balanced budget in much the same time as Labour's spending plans forecast at the last election. Ie, into the second term of parliament, not the first as the Tories originally promised.

So you can hardly give Osborne and Cameron any credit at all for tackling the supposed mess they inherited in any way different than Labour would have done.

In my opinion, the Tories have pushed back the recovery by several years unnecessarily, mostly thanks to ideological reasons and a very poor handling of the economy and public confidence. Real schoolboy mistakes on that front. Although Labour would have done no better, they'd just have made different mistakes.

But even that I could just about forgive them for, given how much I hate Labour's tendency towards social authoritarianism. Particularly as they still just about have time to fix it and drive a recovery before the next election, if they'd only swallow their pride and admit they were wrong.

What I will not forgive them for, and what will lose them the next election, is the current pandering to the racist right and the undoing of many years of moving to the centre.

Placating UKIP is a very dangerous game indeed, and risks not only the next election (there are far more votes in the middle than there are on the right) but also endangers the entire future of the country and our economy.

It is nice to find myself agreeing with SOME of the points made by this poster.

Moby wrote: »

The Tory does not exist in Scotland, Wales or huge swathes of the North in any meaningful way. How can they therefore claim to be a national party? They also follow the politics of divide and rule and pitch sections of the community against each other. A Government is supposed to represent everyone....yes even those who work in the public sector like me! and also those of us who claim benefits. The damage caused to the social fabric by rhetoric deliberately encouraging the bitterness felt to asylum seekers, benefit 'scroungers' etc will create social unrest:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/29/cuts-councils-newcastle-liverpool-sheffield
No matter what your political bias....Does such a govmt deserve respect...?:mad:

This country has somehow managed to live beyond its means for more than 100 years. Initially we had the magic status of the world's reserve currency - arrogant supremacist colonial b......s, but with good accountants and trusted golden money. Every unit of currency created by our government and its banking system, got spent by the UK for its first trip out into fractional reserve banking around the world.
Since then we have lost most of it and flogged off what was left of "the family silver". Now our banks have been found to have had arrogant idiots in charge, like most of the rest of the world. They like out politicians have a vision that extends perhaps 5 years at the most.
The latter group have adopted politics as a career move - not something to be fitted into the evenings after the real work of the day.

Construction is useful in that it can keep semi trained unemployed rioters off the streets and is preferable to simply giving them a housing allowance and a bit of bread & beer money - though there is a case for "circuses" as these create a feeling of togetherness at low cost.
The last lot of Elizabethans tried to fix up the unemployed up with a couple of acres - even in the 1930's a lot of people could get a 30' x 90' plot to keep themselves busy and eak out the dole.

In the final analysis we have to pay our way in the global economy - nobody out there thinks they owe us a living.
Please can a representative from these two groups step forward and tell us what they are intending to do to obtain some money from a foreigner, rather than try to get it off one of their fellow citizens:

public sector/benefit claimant.

[I suppose I could dig about in the accounts of the BBC and I might find their figures for exports - but anyone got such a figure for the public sector as a whole?]

DecentLivingWage

British exports are not going to save us - I read somewhere that the US successful fiscal recovery plan deal was going to hurt UK exports, making them more expensive. (The Pound) Wonder if that means 'compete with them=Act like them = Plan B for growth. Thanks, I too would like more info in this....

GeorgeHowell

angrypirate wrote: »

And so does Daniel Hannan
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100196226/everything-will-look-different-after-david-cameron-embraces-an-inout-referendum/

Both have some very good points

(No points for guessing what Im reading this morning)

It's completely premature to predict who might win a general election in probably over two years away. Much of the electorate is so short-termist, fickle, subjective, and capricious that it can all change almost overnight. Remember when Clegg shot to the lead in the polls after the first of the hapless TV debates, to end up back where he started by the time of the election ? Polls mean very little mid-term. Milliband could turn out to be perceived as another Kinnock, or Cameron as another Major, or both. The coalition might collapse in the meantime with unpredictable consequences. Forthcoming developments in and about Europe could alter UKIP's present bounce. The Lib Dems may or may not remain grounded at <=10%. It's all to play for.

BertieUK

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

It's completely premature to predict who might win a general election in probably over two years away. Much of the electorate is so short-termist, fickle, subjective, and capricious that it can all change almost overnight. Remember when Clegg shot to the lead in the polls after the first of the hapless TV debates, to end up back where he started by the time of the election ? Polls mean very little mid-term. Milliband could turn out to be perceived as another Kinnock, or Cameron as another Major, or both. The coalition might collapse in the meantime with unpredictable consequences. Forthcoming developments in and about Europe could alter UKIP's present bounce. The Lib Dems may or may not remain grounded at <=10%. It's all to play for.

The Telegraph state....

''What it showed was that despite the media obsession that Ukip is taking Tory votes - which of course we are - what those Northern constituencies showed is that Labour votes are coming to Ukip in real numbers too.''

...So nearer to the General Election it will be very interesting as to how each party will deliver their Mandate in view of the ever increasing popularity of Ukip.