Ian-S Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Skynet FTW. It started with RFID chips, now it's internet confusion, but it won't be long until the machines have completely enslaved us, bugger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pognoi Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Not if you vote monster raving loonies. It'll be a necessity for all civilians in the UK to have access to a nuclear bomb so if a robot ever did come along, us boot weilding beardy men on unicorns can wipe them off the face off the earth! Ian-S 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Users Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I'm voting UKIP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroDan Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I work in schools. After dealing with Gove for 4 years, the Tories can do one. This education spending "increase" has gone on vanity projects like academies and free schools... pluk, Ian-S and JoshC. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paige Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 This education spending "increase" has gone on vanity projects like academies and free schools... This might not be a very valid comment as my school is pretty awful anyway, but I attend an academy and to be honest we don't get much at all resource-wise or anything. From a student's view, I would say that we are worse off than many of the schools in my area to be honest! pognoi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Is it right local authorities are no longer allowed to setup/build/start new schools and all new ones must be academy or free schools? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cal Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 If I could vote, it would have to be UKIP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Users Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 I'm actually voting green in local and labour in general. JoshC., Tom and MachoMachine 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Is it right local authorities are no longer allowed to setup/build/start new schools and all new ones must be academy or free schools?That is not true. Setting up new schools is still possible.As a warning our green council took out a £36m loan for a 138m tall observation tower, stopped subsadising the buses, scrapped our park and ride, raised parking fees to put people off from going into town, raised council tax for businesses so now only cloths shops survive, introduced 20mph speed limit everywhere despite lots of evidence to say its made things worse, cut pay for bin men and other essentials to pay for more social workers, illegally built hockey pitchs, ignored 2 votes of no confidence, raised council tax for residents 2% every year despite being told to freeze them (the only reason they didnt raise it more is becuase otherwise there would have been a local referendum) and has failed to set a budget every year. There is atleast 10 other points I could make in detail about how bad they have been. Also at work 20 of us were asked to name one good policy the green council has introduced of which the entire room could not come up with a single reason. Ian-S and AJ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Actually that's not technically true (the school bit) the Academies Act 2010 (I just read it) states all new schools must be free schools or academies, Local Authorities cannot run these types of schools and if they have to open one due to demand, they have to put the running of the school out to tender. I did a little more research, this happened round here with the new school that opened last year, I never took any notice of it until now, but they are very proud to be the first 'primary academy' in the area and it's run by a private company according to their website, this company was given the building free as well. So the LEA can open a new school if they want, but they're not allowed to run/operate it and it can only be an academy or free school, that's like saying you can build a house but must sleep in a tent on the front lawn. As for the Greens, my dad takes a probably unhealthly interest in how Brighton is run and has told me before about everything you mentioned, they really are slightly too crazy for my liking personally. He said their latest hair brain scam was on 'rain' days they were going to reduce parking costs on Maidera Drive to encourage tourism - seriously? I've also never understood this theory that lowering speed limits reduces emissions, it's double dutch because the car takes longer to complete it's journey, thus putting more pollution out, the only place there should be strict slow speed restrictions is outside schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pognoi Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Some of the points you have raised LC aren't necessarily bad depending on tour perspective. The new development on the beach front could be very beneficial for Brighton. The town is already in decline and relies on its own residents internally for alot of its business but the developments the greens have done my attract a new and larger crowd for brighton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshC. Posted May 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Out of all the parties, Green is the one I'd be most inclined to vote for. But, like others have said, some of their policies are great, whereas some just...aren't. Which makes it difficult to vote for them. I kind of got annoyed as well by some of their broadcasting, namely... Sure, it's quite funny, but it feels very cheap and accepting that some of their policies aren't the best.. The other 'big' parties are just a no for me as well.. So, unless a MRLP candidates is running in my area (I actually haven't checked), then I'll be spoiling my ballot this time around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Spoiling the paper is the only way to 'make your vote count', it's what I'll be doing too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluk Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Like it or not whatever way anyone votes here in England we will end up with either Cameron or Milliband as PM, most likely with a sidekick from one one the fringe parties by their side to make up the numbers. That leaves me as a voter with quite a poor choice. I don't consider myself to be aligned to any one party but have pretty reliably voted conservative historically, often against some of my own principles. Mostly to avoid the shear incompetents of the alternative, for the greater good if you will. I have no idea who I am voting for later today. Can't bring myself to vote for the conservatives with some of the things they have done and will do, I firmly believe labour would be disastrous for the economy and country as a whole, UKIP do make sense in some areas but appear dangerously unhinged in others. I actually think the Lib Dems have done a pretty good job of influencing and controlling the worst of Cameron and May and don't really get the level of bad press that's being thrown at them, that's probably the way I'm leaning at the moment. AJ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Libdems get bad press because of the university fees, they actively targeted students with a specific promise to win their vote then at the first opportunity abandoned it in favour of the lure of government (not that I blame them as it was the only hope they ever have of getting into government). It didn't effect me but I know plenty friends who's kids were led up the garden path and got crapped on as a result, what they've done since will, in some people's eyes, never make up for that one broken promise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altitude Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Voting Labour tonight! I'll never vote for Cameron, or Farage, but that's just my choice I'll be voting Green locally too. Cameron has cocked so many things up since the tories have been in power, they lie about what they've done and seem to get away with it! The only good thing has been gay marriage, but that's not as straight forward as I thought it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluk Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 I know the bad press comes from the student fees issue, but I thought they handled that quite well overall. Deciding it was a necessary concession to get them in a position of influence within the government and then publicly apologising for it, whenever do you see a political part do that rather than try to spin their way out of it? I find it quite refreshing. Conservatives (primarily May) are just to evil in general and destructive to my situation personally. Labour lost me during question time ("did you spend too much when you were last in power?" .... "no". Well you are an idiot then. Admit to, and learn from, your mistakes) and can't be trusted to be competent with my tax money If only a party would pledge to stop privatising and outsourcing everything in sight (and re nationalise plenty that's already gone), support and protect the emergency services and armed forces, cut back benefits (excluding DLA) to a point where they weren't an option to chose to live on and get out of Europe. They'd have my vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Don't get me started on May and Smith, it's embarrassing enough to share the same initials as IDS. I don't believe all the spin about benefits and the unemployed bleeding the country dry, the unemployment benefits bill is tiny in comparison to what is spent on tax credits and other stuff such as oh, err, the 'war on terror'... and had the Conservatives not removed the rent cap on social housing associations when they came to power the housing benefits bill wouldn't have skyrocketed either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluk Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 I don't believe all the spin about benefits and the unemployed bleeding the country dry, the unemployment benefits bill is tiny in comparison to what is spent on tax credits... That isn't based on spin, it's based on what I find in the world. I won't go in to specifics but I come in to contact with pretty much all sections of society, and there is a not insignificant amount of people choosing not to work and living off of the state, In my opinion the welfare state is there to keep people alive, keep them fed and sheltered, but it has grown into a monster keeping people in Sky TV, mobile contracts, alcohol, cigarettes and many other things that can't be seen as essential to living. And I don't just mean unemployment benefit, the massive complex and inefficient benefit system dressed up as tax credits is just wrong across the board and should be stripped back far far further than it has been already. Living on benefits should be a hard life. Disability allowance excluded, naturally. If labour get in I'm sure they'll just open the wallet again and start splashing the cash exactly where they shouldn't. Just like they did last time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Balls has said if he get's in he'll follow Osbourne's idea, whether he means that or not is another thing. Tax credits are complicated, but they're for everybody, working or not, infact some tax credits are not available to the unemployed. However I do agree with you, Sky, mobiles, internet, 42" TV's, iPads etc are not a necessity to live and it pisses he off no end to see people apparently spending their £70 a week on that, but there is often more to this than meets the eye, a person could have bought the TV long before becoming unemployed, or has bought t on credit (which is another conversation all together). We have a problem in this country where the jump between being unemployed and the benefit of being employed is not a big enough financial gap, so it is very often better for a person financially to sign on than it is work full time, this was made worse when the social housing cap was scrapped, meaning new tenants had to find 3x as much to rent their flat than their neighbour. I won't go into specifics either but I often work with people who are so near the bottom of the barrel they cannot see daylight, and I can assure you they don't have TV's, mobiles or sky and living on £70 a week is a struggle, especially if they get sanctioned for 3 months due to arriving 2 minutes late for their assessment thanks to the bus arriving late, IDS has done a very good job of painting a picture of the country being bought to it's knees and it's simply not true (but there are some bad apples as you say). IMHO the whole system needs scrapping and starting again, the Governement needs to stop privatising off everything and neglecting all the bits they are responsible for, and get out of Europe, not that we can, even if there was a 100% turnout and 99% voted to leave, we couldn't action it. Mer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshC. Posted May 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 However I do agree with you, Sky, mobiles, internet, 42" TV's, iPads etc are not a necessity to live and it pisses he off no end to see people apparently spending their £70 a week on that,Might be seen as playing devil's advocate here a bit, but in today's society, for your average person, I think having a mobile and internet is a necessity. I'm certainly not saying people need £40 a month contracts to get then the latest smart phone with 8GB of data our whatever, nor super super fast internet. But a basic mobile phone and an internet connection will help people so much of used appropriately in my opinion. Of course, of someone is living off benefits it shouldn't be their main priority, but I'm not particularly opposed to the idea of people spending their £70 or whatever a week towards that. (I'm not sure if I've slightly misinterpreted your post here, so apologises if I have!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 No you didn't, I just didn't make myself clear, I have a half decent smartphone and it costs me about a quid to run a month, but then I'm not on the phone all day every day - Internet is a little different, there are oftn hidden charges, like the need to rent a phone line at £15 a month on top, I guess you could say this is what library is for. But as you say, £40 a month contract phones are not necessary, it was those I was talking about. You highlight a good issue, money management, the number of people I come across that have no idea of their outgoings is astronomical, and a fair percentage of these are NOT unemployed, it should be taught in schools from a very young age IMHO. JoshC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluk Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Might be seen as playing devil's advocate here a bit, but in today's society, for your average person, I think having a mobile and internet is a necessity. And I find it incredible that such an educated fellow could even consider that the case! It just goes to show how far we have slipped from reality if we are thinking these frivolous things are actually essential to anyone and should be provided by the state on an individual basis. We used to provide libraries, not give people books! It might sound harsh but if you really have nothing and no work you should be housed and fed, so rent paid and food vouchers with minimal disposable cash on top. Suddenly work would look a whole lot more attractive to people who currently chose not to, as would making people work for their benefits. Tax credits are complicated, but they're for everybody, working or not, infact some tax credits are not available to the unemployed. That is exactly what I'm saying, this situation is clearly mental. It's arguably these people that are taking benefits to give themselves the luxuries in life more than those on unemployment. It should just stop, and people should simply live within their means. I work with people who can not work a minute over their contract (although they are quite capable of doing so and the opportunity is often present) as it would cost them substantially more than they earn in lost benefits, how can that be a thing?! Quite how the massive change I believe is required could be implemented now, in a system that is so deeply flawed, I don't quite know. I imagine it would have to come hand in hand with an increase in minimum wage and some extra employment rights, so shifting the onus to reward people with a comfortable wage on business rather than the state. JoshC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian-S Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 I understand Josh's view, to apply for a job you have to have access to a phone, there are only so many free call cubicals in the jobshop and phone companies are not in the business of providing their services for free, so someone somewhere has go pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Under Labour's system of benefits it was and still is possible to earn more than that of what a teacher can earn. People which claim child benefits for more than 2 children is also completely unacceptable. If people want children that's fine, they can have as many as they like. However it should be down to them to pay for them rather than having the tax payer pay for them. The whole benefit system is broken. The fact someone from the EU could claim full child benefit for children not even in the UK from day one of getting here is ridiculous. Labour showed no sign of change and I'm sure a Labour government will see these sorts of stupid things back in. Government should be scalled back and it's powers reduced. Ian-S 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.