David Cameron

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

richa2002

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,143
The problem is, I find there is little to distinguish between Labour & the Tories. People who are right wing have to resort to voting for the BNP to prove a point that they feel they are not represented by any of the main parties.
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
Cameraon strikes me a bit of a greasy character from the same school as Bliar.

It is sad that politicians from the main parties are so desperate to be elected that they will go around asking voters what they want from the party rather than standing up for any priniciples. Let's not forget why the parties are so named;

Conservatives - traditionally from the upper and upper / middle classes; so named because any change is bound to be detrimental to them.

Labour - up with the workers brother.

Liberal Democrats - bit of a mish-mash here; liberal - anything goes, just elect us. Democrat; change the voting system so that we can be elected.

Nowadays, they all sing the same song.....the Conservatives want to keep that edifice of publically owned inefficiency which is the NHS, Labour have lost the plot and become champagne socialists and the Liberal Democrats are as irrelevant as they have been for the last fifty years.

On the subject of 'Dave'; flying all the way to Greenland to publicise the effects of global warming? That ain't right and the fool won't be getting my vote.
 

theblackwatch

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2006
Messages
10,400
Richard is right, the two parties are much more similar than they used to be. I think David Cameron has come over quite well, although I've not trusted the Tories since they put me out of work in 1995 (I don't bear grudges, honest!). Having said that, I think labour have lost their way too. And I'm not sure about the Lib Dems, thought Kennedy was ok but not keen on the new guy - calling himself Ming when his name is Menzies, almost as bad as Mrs Bucket in 'Keeping Up Appearances'!! ;)
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
And I'm not sure about the Lib Dems, thought Kennedy was ok but not keen on the new guy - calling himself Ming when his name is Menzies, almost as bad as Mrs Bucket in 'Keeping Up Appearances'!! ;)
Kennedy was my kind of guy - liked his beer and had a good looking bird. His policies though...

The problem I have with 'Ming' is that even when I was at school it was an abbreviation for 'minger' - not what I would choose as a name for myself! Perhaps he should rebrand himself as 'stoaty' :-P
 

Bighat

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2005
Messages
432
Location
Ilford
Richard is right, the two parties are much more similar than they used to be. I think David Cameron has come over quite well, although I've not trusted the Tories since they put me out of work in 1995 (I don't bear grudges, honest!). Having said that, I think labour have lost their way too. And I'm not sure about the Lib Dems, thought Kennedy was ok but not keen on the new guy - calling himself Ming when his name is Menzies,

Not only does HE call himself 'Ming', so does every other self-respecting Scotsman whose name is Menzies. It is always pronounced 'mingies', and shorthened to 'Ming'. Thought someone calling themselves 'theblackwatch' would have known that!
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
The problem is, I find there is little to distinguish between Labour & the Tories. People who are right wing have to resort to voting for the BNP to prove a point that they feel they are not represented by any of the main parties.
I disagree with that. I am right wing, and I think the majority of the right will stick with the Conservatives. The BNP are simply to right wing for most people's tastes.

On the subject of 'Dave'; flying all the way to Greenland to publicise the effects of global warming? That ain't right and the fool won't be getting my vote.
You'd not vote for a politician because he highlighted an important world issue in a way you don't agree with?
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
You'd not vote for a politician because he highlighted an important world issue in a way you don't agree with?
It was highlighted many years; he's just emitted another pointless couple of tonnes of CO2 to highlight it again. Its the cause that needs to be tackled not the effect.

It would have been far more productive to the green cause to have just phoned up Hu Jintao and told him to get control of China's emissions and threaten a trade embargo.
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
It would have been far more productive to the green cause to have just phoned up Hu Jintao and told him to get control of China's emissions and threaten a trade embargo.
If David Cameron were in power he could do that. He's not, so threating that would be rather pointless.

Anyway, I think the problem with a trade embargo is that it hurts the people of China, more than it hurts the government of China.
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
If David Cameron were in power he could do that. He's not, so threating that would be rather pointless.

Anyway, I think the problem with a trade embargo is that it hurts the people of China, more than it hurts the government of China.
Answering those points;

1....Is he not a PM in waiting? Gordon or Dave? vote now....

2....Agree with that point, why should we deprive the rest of the world our standard of living? We will all suffer the consequences of excess energy consumption.
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
1....Is he not a PM in waiting? Gordon or Dave? vote now....
Yeah, but your argument was that he could threaten to impose trade sanctions. This wouldn't have much effect, as he it was four years until the next General election when he visited the iceberg.

2....Agree with that point, why should we deprive the rest of the world our standard of living? We will all suffer the consequences of excess energy consumption.
The problem is, we need to make China and India more economical, as well as the US. Without those three countries agreeing, we in Britain can save all the carbon we like. It won't matter one inch.
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
You're hitting the nail on the head there; politicians are in it for the short term and small countries like us feel we can't make a difference becuase of our size.

What is needed is education, both in the developed world (where it is happening slowly) and in the developing world.

Jose Pipe in Mexico must be told that aspiring to a Jeep Cherokeee is not good.

Ho-flung Dung in China must be aware that wanting fly away for a holiday in Europe is not good.

Similarly, the message must be brought home to F. A T'yank Jr and all the other developed nations.

It is a global responsibility (and global co-operation can work; the agreed ban of CFC's is a prime example of this).
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
I don't agree with you on "flying to Europe is not good" and all that. I think that really air travel is simply not as bad at polluting the atmosphere as many cars, due to the amount of passengers it takes. Also, things like excess energy use in the home is very bad for the environment.

What I would do is keep energy prices near the same for basic levels of energy, but if people use more, they have to pay a lot more towards it. I think this will definately make a difference if it was done in America, and indeed in Europe, but sadly it is a very difficult process to get such a thing though parliament.
 

theblackwatch

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2006
Messages
10,400
Richard is right, the two parties are much more similar than they used to be. I think David Cameron has come over quite well, although I've not trusted the Tories since they put me out of work in 1995 (I don't bear grudges, honest!). Having said that, I think labour have lost their way too. And I'm not sure about the Lib Dems, thought Kennedy was ok but not keen on the new guy - calling himself Ming when his name is Menzies,

Not only does HE call himself 'Ming', so does every other self-respecting Scotsman whose name is Menzies. It is always pronounced 'mingies', and shorthened to 'Ming'. Thought someone calling themselves 'theblackwatch' would have known that!
Well I learn something every day, thanks for that!! Presumbly the (former) retailer John Menzies should actually be pronounced John Mingies too? If so, I never heard anyone get it right, includies someone who worked for them!
 

Nick W

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2005
Messages
1,438
Location
Cambridge
What I would do is keep energy prices near the same for basic levels of energy, but if people use more, they have to pay a lot more towards it. I think this will definately make a difference if it was done in America, and indeed in Europe, but sadly it is a very difficult process to get such a thing though parliament.
This will encourage people not to have big families, and that's not gonna help the pension crisis!

I want SOME immigration, but not an open door. That’s perfectly reasonable in a country as densely populated as this as there too many people putting pressure on public services.
But don't immigrants put more into the tax pot than they get out from public services? They're not costing about £20,000 to educate for one thing.

The young cannot afford the house prices
This is temporary as more young people are living apart from parents than before so more houses are needed. After a while we'll have built enough houses and lower prices will resume.

The old cannot afford the council tax bills.
But expect street lights, parks, signalled road crossings and public transport, all of which have to be paid for.

Labour has done everything to undermine workers wages (tax credits, too much immigration).
Immigrants tend to take jobs no one else wants like packing sandwiches into bags. Tax credits means that people are encouraged to work rather than live off job seekers benefit.

I’d also like less state control.
I agree with you. People who actually know what they're doing should be in charge. Just ask any teacher.

It’s interesting the Tories have chosen to adapt green credentials. The roots of this are in things they don’t like: Airport expansion and too many cars ruining country homes, globalisation (which is very energy intensive) changing the face of this country. BTW all nations’ governments believe climate change is a threat now, a little known fact.
Whether anything will happen is also debatable. The petrol tax has not gone up the rate it should due to oil price going up too much (lame excuse). Busses still waste time at stops while people pay (except in London I guess). Car transport is intergrated while public transport isn't. Cycling is put at a far lower priority than cars.

Interestingly, according to studies by several universities, the UK became unsustainable around 1963 - the year of the Beeching reports
Today
But without the Beeching axe, there might not have been any freight left on the railway by now. Certainly not any profitable freight operations that exist now.
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
This will encourage people not to have big families, and that's not gonna help the pension crisis!
Not really. It could be done on per person in household basis.

But don't immigrants put more into the tax pot than they get out from public services? They're not costing about £20,000 to educate for one thing.
Perhaps, percentage wise. However, there is firstly no definate proof of this. Secondly, not all immigrants are putting tax into the tax pot at all. So one could argue that we should only accept those immigrants who contribute to the state.
 

Max

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
5,366
Location
Cardiff
At home we personally think David Cameron is a bit of a slimy character, and I believe that David Davis would have made a better leader. He has more charisma and more experience. Cameron really needs to get down to business and get some decent policies down!
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
David Davis has more charisma? He has the charisma of a dried up piece of cardboard. :p

The problem with DD is that, in my parents' and my experiences with him, he is a tad lazy. I don't think he is leadership material, to be honest. He would have continued the party down the same route and the Conservatives would have lost the general election. The party needs change to win.

And as for policies; there's at least year before it is widely necessary to have all your key policies down.
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
And as for policies; there's at least year before it is widely necessary to have all your key policies down.
If their policies reflected their beliefs (if they have any), then it should take about a month to get them published, not a year. That is time being lost, during which they could have been forcing their policies into the media and hence into the public conciousness.

Imagine going to church and the vicar telling the assembled congregation to come back in a few months because he is going to ask the public what he should be preaching.

The Conservatives (and to a lesser extent the other main parties) don't lack policies, they lack any sort of idealogical vision and are not fit to govern.
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
If their policies reflected their beliefs (if they have any), then it should take about a month to get them published, not a year. That is time being lost, during which they could have been forcing their policies into the media and hence into the public conciousness.
It doesn't take three years to get their policies into public conciousness.

The Conservatives (and to a lesser extent the other main parties) don't lack policies, they lack any sort of idealogical vision and are not fit to govern.
So who are fit to govern then?
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
It doesn't take three years to get their policies into public conciousness.
It does if no-ones listening!

Myself, I think new policies being launched in the run-up to an election are more than likely just electioneering, spouting what the electorate want to hear with no real conviction behind it; nothing more and nothing less.


So who are fit to govern then?
It's difficult to answer that - the only parties which currently are truly committed to making real changes are the single issue parties, many of which are considered by the majority of society as being dangerous extremists or crackpots.

OOI, which party would you vote for and why?
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
OOI, which party would you vote for and why?
The Conservatives. I believe in individualism more than I do in social responsibility, in that I believe we should all be rewarded for our successes. As well as this, I believe lower taxes do help growth in industry. I realise Cameron has not promised such measures, and to an extent I agree with him. We do need economical stability before we can tax, but hopefully there will be room for both. As well as this, I believe that people should have freedom to spend their own money and, to an extent more than is present today, be able to look after themselves. The Conservatives have views that are close to the views I hold.

Which party would you vote for and why?
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
I think it would be true to call myself a conservative (with a small c), wishing to spend my money how I see fit after being given the opportunity to make it through private enterprise.

It seems to me that the Conservatives are steadily drifting towards the centre ground (along with the Lib-Dems), so it is becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate between these parties and Labour (who realised in the early nineties that to become electable, a shift to the right was needed).

My feeling is that as the nation becomes more apathetic about politics, the old ideals that used to differentiate the parties are being lost; people just don't care any more. Even 20 years ago, the choices available were clear-cut and each party had well defined policies, nowadays they just seem to drift with public opinion. It might just be me, but I really do not know what any of the three main parties actually stand for now (which comes back to the point about how long it might take to get the policy messages into my conciousness).
 

David

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Messages
5,104
Location
Scunthorpe
My main point about immiggration is that it has denied me a decent job since the EU borders were opened to Eastern European countries. Since the Polish, and people from other countries started moving over here, I have found it is just about impossible to get a decent job, as they have taken just about every job going in the North Lincolnshire region. Things are that bad around here, I have had to take a job in a different area, rather than sit on JSA while waiting for a job to come available in Scunthorpe.

Result?

Record unemployment for the area, and unemployment nationally is going up as there isn't enough jobs to go around. This situation is only going to get worse when Romania and Bulgaria join the EU in the new year.

All I can hope for then, is that I am not made redundant in favour of an East European driver who doesn't know the UK driving laws and doesn't know his/her way round the country.

No offence is intended in this post, this sums up how I feel about immigration.
 

David

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Messages
5,104
Location
Scunthorpe
The country become a backwater place if we pull out of the EU? Now your having a laugh....

Just look at Swizterland and Norway's economies. Neither of those 2 are in the EU, but look at the way they're going about it....
 

frasier

Member
Joined
29 Sep 2005
Messages
62
The problem with Switzerland is that it is a very expensive place to live. But the rail system is incredible.

On immigration, I would say that we do need some immigrants, but I think that we have to be careful not to accept immigrants who will not contribute anything to our economy, or that they are not fleeing from percecution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top