I would have bet my bottom dollar I'd be conservative or at a push ukip but I've got lib fucking dem.

 

I think it's spending too much time on here with you bedwetting hand wringing yoghurt knitting teacher lovers!

 

www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/

 

 

The Mrs just answered and got UKIP after thinking she'd get lib dem.

 

Someone debunk this as bullshit please.

 

You can also use this as a reminder that you have until the 20th of April to register to vote.

Gideon will unveil his 12 billion welfare cuts in an emergency budget in July.

 

Now you'll get to see what you voted for boys and girls.

we will indeed

 

we'll see what we can actually afford

Yes using them , not because he cares that they have jobs be a use he makes money out of them.

 

Do not get me wrong as you know I work in one of the most commercial markets in the world people making money is not an evil thing, but the example given is so fucking pathetic.

 

The rich corporates find a million ways to avoid tax, let's close those loop holes.

With you on the tax thing

 

However, not on the using thing

 

Are they not using him too?

 

"Using" generally assumes that both parties do not come out of it with something.

 

Also, what if the man does care that some of them have jobs? that and making money from the work they do doesn't have to be mutually exclusive

 

Look at Smiffs' example of his pay to workers; I'm sure it's not completely altruistic, as worker satisfaction probably = better results. However, I bet there is an amount of thought towards it that is because they are colleagues that work together every day and there is an empathy there

 

I assume that of course....

Edited May 16, 201511 yr by jules_darby

When it goes tits up, no-one will be allowed on the space-ark me and Doc Cox are planning just on the virtue they accumalated lots of bits of paper or zeros on a computer screen before the end time, it'll be entry on merit (gold and silver also accepted - NO DIAMONDS!)

The 'no diamonds' bit isn't a thinly veiled anti-semitism btw, all faiths welcome, just check them at the beam-up gate.

When it goes tits up, no-one will be allowed on the space-ark me and Doc Cox are planning just on the virtue they accumalated lots of bits of paper or zeros on a computer screen before the end time, it'll be entry on merit (gold and silver also accepted - NO DIAMONDS!)

The rich will more than probably already have a plan in place which doesn't involve the peasants.

The 'no diamonds' bit isn't a thinly veiled anti-semitism btw, all faiths welcome, just check them at the beam-up gate.

 

Money talks, but it don't sing and dance and it don't walk......

The über-rich do (have a plan) that's why gold and silver prices spike every time there's a bit of grim fiscal news...The real povos will be alreet too, they're used to gnawing bones for nourishment and growing fungus and herbs. It's the middle I fear for, living in a fiat-based fools' Paradise.

Edited May 16, 201511 yr by Youri McAnespie

Money talks, but it don't sing and dance and it don't walk......

The Adventures of Stevie V?

I walked past those tent dwellers at the central library yesterday and being the cynic I am noticed some top quality outdoor kit on display. Were they donated?

You know the million bone idle workshy cunts who can't be arsed doing the jobs that a million migrants do?

 

Maybe if they weren't sponging so much there would be more money left in the pot for the vulnerable and the nasty tories wouldn't have to be so nasty?

How many of those 'bone idle cunts' may be hard grafting benefits cheats? The mind boggles...BTW Those swampies and swampettas liberated that good gear from capitalip pigs during the riots of erm...whenever the riot were.

Gideon will unveil his 12 billion welfare cuts in an emergency budget in July.

Now you'll get to see what you voted for boys and girls.

Thing is, figures get thrown around and it can be hard to put them in context

 

12bn is a lot. But do you know how much more we spend than we raise at the moment? Best part of 100bn.

 

Do you really think we can just spend money we don't have, without consequence?

 

If we hadn't racked up so much debt we'd have 65bn more to spend, instead of paying that much in interest on our loans

 

Fwiw focusing on benefits is a shame as genuinely needy people will suffer. I think more focus should be turned onto pensions, and tax avoidance.

 

But if we don't out our house in order soon 12bn of cuts will be a picnic.

Gideon will unveil his 12 billion welfare cuts in an emergency budget in July.

 

Now you'll get to see what you voted for boys and girls.

 

 

I think the £12bn wasn't real, more one of a number of points on which to negotiate in a coalition

 

The annual deficit is down to £80bn, with some further refinements to come. If we continue to achieve decent growth then it can gently land over the term of this government.

The interest on what we have borrowed from the money markets and have to pay back is £43bn this coming year.

 

That's more than we spend on education.

If you want a real shocker have a look at the pfi debt Blair and brown saddled us with and what we will pay back over the next 30 40 50 years. And the reds have the nerve to talk about "privatisation of the nhs"...

 

Makes the 12bn look like loose change.

Oh no, not welfare cuts, how will I sleep a at night.

Oh no, not welfare cuts, how will I sleep a at night.

Hang on, I think most of us want to live in a country where the strong look after the weak it's just that we differ on how to do it.

I'm not even sure we differ on that, I just don't give any credibility to people scaremongering and points scoring on this subject.

Thing is, figures get thrown around and it can be hard to put them in context

 

12bn is a lot. But do you know how much more we spend than we raise at the moment? Best part of 100bn.

 

Do you really think we can just spend money we don't have, without consequence?

 

If we hadn't racked up so much debt we'd have 65bn more to spend, instead of paying that much in interest on our loans

 

Fwiw focusing on benefits is a shame as genuinely needy people will suffer. I think more focus should be turned onto pensions, and tax avoidance.

 

But if we don't out our house in order soon 12bn of cuts will be a picnic.

They said they'd cut welfare by 12 billion without actually saying how they'd do that. This is where we find out.

 

I imagine it ain't going to be pretty.

They said they'd cut welfare by 12 billion without actually saying how they'd do that. This is where we find out.

 

I imagine it ain't going to be pretty.

 

They cant get that kind of money from the 'workshy' and they wont touch pensioners, so its tax credits and child benefit methinks.

 

Also housing benefit but that will impact in London much more than up here.

They cant get that kind of money from the 'workshy' and they wont touch pensioners, so its tax credits and child benefit methinks.

 

Also housing benefit but that will impact in London much more than up here.

 

 

Boom! - in one.

They said they'd cut welfare by 12 billion without actually saying how they'd do that. This is where we find out.

 

I imagine it ain't going to be pretty.

Jeremy Kyle will be rubbing his hands!!

Thing is, figures get thrown around and it can be hard to put them in context

 

12bn is a lot. But do you know how much more we spend than we raise at the moment? Best part of 100bn.

 

Do you really think we can just spend money we don't have, without consequence?

 

If we hadn't racked up so much debt we'd have 65bn more to spend, instead of paying that much in interest on our loans

 

Fwiw focusing on benefits is a shame as genuinely needy people will suffer. I think more focus should be turned onto pensions, and tax avoidance.

 

But if we don't out our house in order soon 12bn of cuts will be a picnic.

 

Here's an idea, why not start with the £11.7 billion ring fenced foreign aid?. Aid workers in Africa on £1000 per day, 60% being handed over to the huge multinational aid organisations to be lost in the morass of their bloated structures. Most of the rest going to those good "friends" of ours - Pakistan, Ethiopia and Bangladesh.  

 

http://www.theweek.co.uk/63394/foreign-aid-where-does-uks-overseas-development-aid-go

I've just started reworking the system I suggested in 2010 and will let you know the outcome (eventually) as it seems to meet your criterion.

What I can say for certain is that the SNP would come out with maybe 30 to 40 seats, and not 56 out of 59.

 

Con 257 (Scot 8, Wales 12, NE 7, Yorks 20, NW 27, WMids 27, EMids 20, East 31, SE 48, SW 30, London 27)

Lab 217 (Scot 15, Wales 16, NE 15, Yorks 24, NW 35, WMids 22, EMids 16, East 13, SE 16, SW 9, London 36)

UKIP 84 (Wales 6, NE 5, Yorks 10, NW 11, WMids 9, EMids 8, East 11, SE 13, SW 8, London 3)

LD 33 (Scot 4, Wales 1, NE 2, Yorks 2, NW 2, WMids 1, East 3, SE 6, SW 7, London 5)

SNP 32

PC 5

DUP 5

SF 5

Green 4 (SE 1, SW 1, London 2)

SDLP 3,

UUP 2

Alliance 2

Independent 1.