NationStates

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:05 am**

Priory Academy USSR wrote:
Trotskylvania wrote:If you voted for the Lib Dems last time around, you got exactly what you deserved.

What does someone deserve for voting for a centrist party with actually quite good policies?

A Conserative right wing government that hates everything they stand for.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:06 am**

Quintium wrote:
Priory Academy USSR wrote:
What does someone deserve for voting for a centrist party with actually quite good policies?

- Getting rid of nuclear weapons that currently act as a deterrent;
- Raising property taxes;
- Extending parental leave at the expense of businesses;
- An amnesty with British citizenship (a 'general pardon') for all illegal immigrants;
- A "strong and positive commitment to Europe";
- Putting limits on British companies selling chemicals abroad.

What am I reading, Labour's party programme?

Exactly my point. I don't see why Trotskylvania thinks that their voters apparently deserve a rightwing coalition.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:10 am**

Conservative.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:11 am**

I'll be voting for Labour.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:14 am**

Labour: even though they are a little weak on Europe, immigration and crime, I don't trust the Tories on the NHS, education and welfare and I don't like the excessive cuts they're forcing on local councils.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:16 am**

To be honest, if I were British I would do anything to prevent UKIP or BNP getting a seat, even if it would mean voting Conservative.

But if I didn't have to worry about strategic voting (like voting *shudders* Labour to make sure the Conservatives don't get a seat), it would depend on the MP. The Greens, Plaid Cymru and SNP have interesting policies, but some Labour and LibDem MPs are good as well and could get my vote.

Respect sounds like an interesting party, but seems to be too much in disarray (as far as I know).

So in the end, it would depend on where I live, really. If I lived in a seat that is safe for a party (doesn't matter which one), I would still have to see what the different MPs think, which is only partially influenced by their party label (you always have a few that go against their colleagues wishes, for better or worse).

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:17 am**

I'm not British but I would vote for the Conservatives if I were.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:19 am**

Dumb Ideologies wrote:Labour: even though they are a little weak on Europe, immigration and crime, I don't trust the Tories on the NHS, education and welfare and I don't like the excessive cuts they're forcing on local councils.

Watch this,it might show you why this is necessary.

Not that i'm voting Tory.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:23 am**

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Dumb Ideologies wrote:Labour: even though they are a little weak on Europe, immigration and crime, I don't trust the Tories on the NHS, education and welfare and I don't like the excessive cuts they're forcing on local councils.

Watch this,it might show you why this is necessary.

Not that i'm voting Tory.

Two things:

The Conservatives have borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Labour actually reduced the debt-GDP ratio greatly during their time in power. Of course, it rose again, but that was to be expected given the massive bank bailouts that took place in the first years of the recession. You'll need to fiddle around with the graph to make it show from 1997.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:24 am**

Conservatives, although I'd be more confident in that decision if they scrapped the bedroom tax and loosened up on the EU (which we should remain in to the extent we are already, in my opinion).

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:25 am**

Priory Academy USSR wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
Watch this,it might show you why this is necessary.

Not that i'm voting Tory.

Two things:

The Conservatives have borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Labour actually reduced the debt-GDP ratio greatly during their time in power. Of course, it rose again, but that was to be expected given the massive bank bailouts that took place in the first years of the recession. You'll need to fiddle around with the graph to make it show from 1997.

Conclusion, let's slice off some more public spending. It's the only way!!

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:32 am**

Priory Academy USSR wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
Watch this,it might show you why this is necessary.

Not that i'm voting Tory.

Two things:

The Conservatives have borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Labour actually reduced the debt-GDP ratio greatly during their time in power. Of course, it rose again, but that was to be expected given the massive bank bailouts that took place in the first years of the recession. You'll need to fiddle around with the graph to make it show from 1997.

Actually going to 1980 is the best picture. The important things are one, there was a recession as the debt rose before they were elected, so that's to be expected. Two, it began to rise again 5 years before the recession. That is what's irresponsible and the Tory's mean when they say a structural deficit. If you compare that with the 80's and going into the recession in the early 90's one can see there was no structural deficit and it was coming down. The structural deficit this time is why the debt levels have so ballooned compared to the recession before.

Hence why the first link whilst true it is intellectually dishonest to also claim it's the Tory's fault when we compare it with the graph in link two. Since that shows that the government was spending too much for a good number of consecutive years before during the boom. "Yes Mr Brown, you can cure boom and bust." What a wally!

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:34 am**

Labour or Lib Dem.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:37 am**

Priory Academy USSR wrote:
The Nihilistic view wrote:
Watch this,it might show you why this is necessary.

Not that i'm voting Tory.

Two things:

The Conservatives have borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Labour actually reduced the debt-GDP ratio greatly during their time in power. Of course, it rose again, but that was to be expected given the massive bank bailouts that took place in the first years of the recession. You'll need to fiddle around with the graph to make it show from 1997.

Off the top of my head on a) they got left with a large budget deficit at the end of New Labour years. On b) they ramped up spending and borrowing in the mid-2000s, riding the wave of a rise in GDP (call it a boom). Whenever the economic cycle turned down (as it always does, whether a normal downturn or the more extreme recession we got) then it was going to leave budget deficit problems and a rapidly increasing debt.

All three major parties were clear on the fact that they felt cuts were needed after the 2010 election.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:42 am**

Forsakia wrote:
Priory Academy USSR wrote:
Two things:

The Conservatives have borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Labour actually reduced the debt-GDP ratio greatly during their time in power. Of course, it rose again, but that was to be expected given the massive bank bailouts that took place in the first years of the recession. You'll need to fiddle around with the graph to make it show from 1997.

Off the top of my head on a) they got left with a large budget deficit at the end of New Labour years. On b) they ramped up spending and borrowing in the mid-2000s, riding the wave of a rise in GDP (call it a boom). Whenever the economic cycle turned down (as it always does, whether a normal downturn or the more extreme recession we got) then it was going to leave budget deficit problems and a rapidly increasing debt.

All three major parties were clear on the fact that they felt cuts were needed after the 2010 election.

only one party promised to eliminate the deficit within the life-time of parliament though. the party that thus far has borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:50 am**

The UK in Exile wrote:
Forsakia wrote:
Off the top of my head on a) they got left with a large budget deficit at the end of New Labour years. On b) they ramped up spending and borrowing in the mid-2000s, riding the wave of a rise in GDP (call it a boom). Whenever the economic cycle turned down (as it always does, whether a normal downturn or the more extreme recession we got) then it was going to leave budget deficit problems and a rapidly increasing debt.

All three major parties were clear on the fact that they felt cuts were needed after the 2010 election.

only one party promised to eliminate the deficit within the life-time of parliament though. the party that thus far has borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

So the coalition got left with a very large budget deficit by Labour, that they've reduced each year?

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:53 am**

I'll be voting Conservative. Cameron isn't as Thatcherite as I'd like, but he's done a pretty good job. I was leaning towards UKIP, but they're not as liberal as I'd like. Ed Miliband is pretty bad, and I don't think Labour can win with him as the leader. I don't know what kind of a politically illiterate voter would elect Nick Clegg.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:53 am**

While I dislike almost the entirety of the shadow cabinet, I would vote Labour for the following reasons:

- I was originally going to vote for the Tories, but their privatisation of the Royal Mail has gotten rid of that idea.
- The Liberal Democrats actually have some nice MPs, it's just a shame that they're led by a spineless idiot. The only Lib Dem leaders I actually liked were Paddy Ashdown and Charles Kennedy.
- Even if I did vote UKIP, it is unlikely that they will get even one seat due to the nature of FPTP, so there's no point really.
- The Greens are one of my least favourite parties because I despise Caroline Lucas and they oppose nuclear power for some reason. There's also the fact that they will never win in the West Country.
- I can't vote for the nationalists because I live in England.
- Respect is the worst one of them all.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:54 am**

Forsakia wrote:
The UK in Exile wrote:
only one party promised to eliminate the deficit within the life-time of parliament though. the party that thus far has borrowed more money than the entirety of New Labour.

So the coalition got left with a very large budget deficit by Labour, that they've reduced each year?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/uk-britain-borrowing-idUKBRE93M09020130423

"There's a small crumb to be had from the fact that borrowing is less than last year, but really that's a political point not an economic one," said David Tinsley, UK economist at BNP Paribas.

"The government seems to be delivering on spending reductions, but it is failing on getting growth ... and that's why the fiscal position isn't improving. It's flat-lining."

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:55 am**

Let's see. The Conservatives aren't really conservative, Labour stopped caring about the working class decades ago, and the Liberal Democrats are neither liberal nor democratic. UKIP are best described as a Thatcherite tribute band who ought to be left to debating in pubs not the House of Commons, and the Green Party are traitors to the Crown and technically shouldn't be legal under the Treason Felony Act. I live in England, so even if I wasn't an avowed unionist I couldn't vote for the SNP or Plaid Cymru.

I have no idea who I should vote for.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:05 am**

Lerodan Chinamerica wrote:Conservative. Cameron isn't as Thatcherite as I'd like, but he's done a pretty good job. Ed Miliband is pretty bad, and I don't think Labour can win with him as the leader. I don't know what kind of a politically illiterate voter would elect Nick Clegg.

Someone who understands the basic meaning of coalition and compromise?

The UK in Exile wrote:
Forsakia wrote:
So the coalition got left with a very large budget deficit by Labour, that they've reduced each year?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/uk-britain-borrowing-idUKBRE93M09020130423

"There's a small crumb to be had from the fact that borrowing is less than last year, but really that's a political point not an economic one," said David Tinsley, UK economist at BNP Paribas.

"The government seems to be delivering on spending reductions, but it is failing on getting growth ... and that's why the fiscal position isn't improving. It's flat-lining."

So now you're jumping over to growth?

And have jumped over the last three quarters showing growth at 0.8, 0.8, and 0.5 (recent first) to a quote given after the last quarter that didn't have decent growth.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united- ... gdp-growth

How curious.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:11 am**

Forsakia wrote:
Lerodan Chinamerica wrote:Conservative. Cameron isn't as Thatcherite as I'd like, but he's done a pretty good job. Ed Miliband is pretty bad, and I don't think Labour can win with him as the leader. I don't know what kind of a politically illiterate voter would elect Nick Clegg.

Someone who understands the basic meaning of coalition and compromise?

The UK in Exile wrote:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/uk-britain-borrowing-idUKBRE93M09020130423

So now you're jumping over to growth?

And have jumped over the last three quarters showing growth at 0.8, 0.8, and 0.5 (recent first) to a quote given after the last quarter that didn't have decent growth.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united- ... gdp-growth

How curious.

Yes how curious. After a double dip recession and the abandonment of the coalition's fiscal plan, we now have exactly the same growth as we had in the last two years of Labour and roughly the same deficit reduction plan. A wise man might draw a lesson from all this, but your a lib-dem voter. so you probably won't.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:13 am**

Lerodan Chinamerica wrote:I'll be voting Conservative. Cameron isn't as Thatcherite as I'd like, but he's done a pretty good job. I was leaning towards UKIP, but they're not as liberal as I'd like. Ed Miliband is pretty bad, and I don't think Labour can win with him as the leader. I don't know what kind of a politically illiterate voter would elect Nick Clegg.

(Image)

Exactly my sentiments on the matter. Though apart from Boris I don't think anyone in the party has the force of personality to go all out like she used to. As she used to say, "They are all a bit wet!"

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:14 am**

The Nihilistic view wrote:
Lerodan Chinamerica wrote:I'll be voting Conservative. Cameron isn't as Thatcherite as I'd like, but he's done a pretty good job. I was leaning towards UKIP, but they're not as liberal as I'd like. Ed Miliband is pretty bad, and I don't think Labour can win with him as the leader. I don't know what kind of a politically illiterate voter would elect Nick Clegg.

(Image)

Exactly my sentiments on the matter. Though apart from Boris I don't think anyone in the party has the force of personality to all out like she used to. As she used to say, "They are all a bit wet!"

Not too wet to stab her in the back though.

Posted: **Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:15 am**

The Tories, although I'd prefer another Conservative-Lib Dem coalition to prevent the Euroskeptic wing of the party forcing a referendum on the country.

Trotskylvania wrote:If you voted for the Lib Dems last time around, you got exactly what you deserved.

Actually, they've managed to implement 70% of their policies, so I guess that those who voted Tory got what they deserved too.

NationStates

UK general election poll