tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 It wasn't meant to goad or upset anyone fair enough ,likewise my reply was aimed at a generic view rather than your wife / yourself ... And she took the milk off my brother a little while back under the 30 year rule they released papers around the milk snatching ... Heath told all departments to cut money , for education he proposed Further Education fees Library book borrowing charges School meal charges stopping Free school milk specifically on the milk issue Thatcher responded by saying ""I think that the complete withdrawal of free milk for our school children would be too drastic a step and would arouse more widespread public antagonism than the saving justifies." Heath made the cuts regardless , although Thatcher did manage to compromise a deal with Heath that milk would be available to pupils in nursery and primary schools. Now i know she is the living evil to a lot of people , but I just thought i'd point it out .... even though Heath , Heath Milk Snatcher doesn't quite have the same ring to it ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 Heath , Heath Milk Snatcher doesn't quite have the same ring to it ... I knew someone that could only pronounce 'thief' as 'fieth'. He could have gone with Heath, Heath milk fieth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 Been watching on BBC2, Gordon Brown was very good tbh. Cameron was better but he's still lacking something, but i've said all along the problem isn't Cameron its the party behind him. Clegg stood his ground and did what he needed to do and came across the best, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted April 22, 2010 Share Posted April 22, 2010 having to pay £8k to secure old age care my Nan had around £80,000 in savings .. to show for 76 years of working hard , saving hard and the desire to leave a little something for her family when she passed away (i don't mean she worked for 76 , btw , thats how old she was when she went into care) .. she's not rich in any real sense of the world , she had no house or any other assets Unfortunately for her a couple of strokes and being in a wheelchair for the last 6 years has meant she has had to live in a nursing home .. Her 80k is now down to around £6k so she finally gets to live in the care home for a slightly reduced rate that is deduced straight from her pension .. most of the other residents have lived there for free for the duration of their stay... whilst some have had to pay just as my nan has .. Now I believe (I've not really studied the proposal in full) that what Cameron is trying to put forward is that someone like my Nan in the future ends up paying £8k max rather than all her savings ... I don't think it's quite the same thing as you have to pay £8k to get old .. What i don't know at this stage is what happens if you don't have £8k ... but currently there are many old people who have had to sell their homes to pay for their care ...which is wrong imo .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted April 22, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 22, 2010 I think Brown has come across really well in these TV debates. I think Cameron has come across quite badly. However, I'm not sure if that has more to do with the expectation that Cameron will be very good at delivering a couple of hours of fake sincerity to camera whilst Brown will be rather bad at anything that involves appearing in daylight. I'm starting to like Brown because he doesn't look like an identikit party leader, so I make the assumption that he must actually be very competent; how else would a man with that face end up as poster boy for a government? Of course in doing that, I know I'm making exactly the same mistake that I'm trying to avoid and that falling for Browns anti-marketing approach is just another marketing approach that I'm buying into, but I still think he's coming out of the debates well. I make no apology for the lack of any sort of policy based reference in this post; the TV debates aren't really about policies, actually, this election isn't really about policies, in fact I'm pretty sure that party politics isn't about policies any more. That's the great thing about modern elections, vote for whoever you like, it's like getting a new postman; at the end of the day, you'll still just get bills and bullshit through your door every morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 a little while back under the 30 year rule they released papers around the milk snatching ... the revelations from previous governments can be fascinating (anorak alert!), I'm currently reading 'Downing Street Diary' by Bernard Donoughue. Briefly, he was part of Wilson's inner circle in 1974 / 1975 and suggests strongly in the book that Labour had soft peddaled that election campaign because they knew what a train wreck the economy was. Somehow the conservatives managed to pedal even softer and Labour won. I'll condense the first 93 pages down: don't really want to win this, the place is a mess..... it's looking closer than we thought..... we've won!!! bugger, now what? ...and now the press are printing stories about us doing dodgy land deals, avoiding tax and cosying up to those that make big donations to the party. could be an interesting reflection on the current bunch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted April 23, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted April 23, 2010 Who would have believed the Lib Dems could offer a viable alternative to the main 2 parties? Not me, but the fact is they are coming out on top. Floating voters have had enough of these two parties who have dragged our great country into its present state. The Lib Dems are gonna make real in roads in this election and thats from speaking to people who normally wouldn't even vote! Even the press are wasting their precious propaganda articles on them and that tells me the same story, they are a threat a real threat and maybe a real change. Lib Dems for me, ive had enough of the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted April 23, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted April 23, 2010 Looks like I'll have to wait until Sunday night to watch the debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 having to pay £8k to secure old age care my Nan had around £80,000 in savings .. to show for 76 years of working hard , saving hard and the desire to leave a little something for her family when she passed away (i don't mean she worked for 76 , btw , thats how old she was when she went into care) .. she's not rich in any real sense of the world , she had no house or any other assets Unfortunately for her a couple of strokes and being in a wheelchair for the last 6 years has meant she has had to live in a nursing home .. Her 80k is now down to around £6k so she finally gets to live in the care home for a slightly reduced rate that is deduced straight from her pension .. most of the other residents have lived there for free for the duration of their stay... whilst some have had to pay just as my nan has .. Now I believe (I've not really studied the proposal in full) that what Cameron is trying to put forward is that someone like my Nan in the future ends up paying £8k max rather than all her savings ... I don't think it's quite the same thing as you have to pay £8k to get old .. What i don't know at this stage is what happens if you don't have £8k ... but currently there are many old people who have had to sell their homes to pay for their care ...which is wrong imo ..Aye I know that's the idea, and it's better than the current system by a mile, but I still think it's not going far enough. We have a national health service, and that service should extend to nursing care for all people that need it, it is afterall a health service. Labour's manifesto pledge is to cap care costs at 2 years, and to eventually bring in free care for all after 2015. Now I don't know how much care currently costs, I'm guessing that it's more than £4k a year, but the striving for free care for all is something that I really think should be done. I was impressed though that all of the leaders in the first debate acknowledged that it was something that they all had to work on a solution for. I guess I was overly dismissive of the Tory policy, but I'm not a fan of sticking a figure on something like that, when £8k to some people is a drop in the ocean, and to others is a huge chunk of their savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted April 23, 2010 Moderator Share Posted April 23, 2010 Difficult call. indeed ..i mean i can see why people could feel that way ..would just like to think they wouldn't actually go on the street throwing parties I doubt very much people will be going around throwing parties. I dare say that many will just be relieved that the **** bitch finally got her just deserts. I'll be partying hard, I even have a list of people I'll be going out with that night, we have promised to conga around town singing Ding Dong the Witch is Dead as we go, the day the evil hag croaks it will be a great day indeed and it surely can't be far off now can it? Shame Gordon Brown sings her praises, though not entirely shocking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I've said it before but I still don't get why so many people vote on outdated political allegiances. maybe they aren't ? the sky vote thingy seemed to show most VT people agreed with the poliices that related to the party they happened to support .. of course some of them may well have known the policy they were picking and which party it related to .. No offence intended on this but having endured numerous political threads on VT over the years I'm pretty sure if Cameron was on stage wearing nothing but a gimp mask and shitting into a brown paper bag you'd still vote Tory, and Drat likewise for labour. However, I was talking more outside of VT, I know plenty who will not really look at the policies in any depth or be swayed by the tv debates, they will vote for whomever they have always voted for, sadly, even though the political spectrum no longer exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 I think Brown has come across really well in these TV debates. I think Cameron has come across quite badly. However, I'm not sure if that has more to do with the expectation that Cameron will be very good at delivering a couple of hours of fake sincerity to camera whilst Brown will be rather bad at anything that involves appearing in daylight. I'm starting to like Brown because he doesn't look like an identikit party leader, so I make the assumption that he must actually be very competent; how else would a man with that face end up as poster boy for a government? Of course in doing that, I know I'm making exactly the same mistake that I'm trying to avoid and that falling for Browns anti-marketing approach is just another marketing approach that I'm buying into, but I still think he's coming out of the debates well. I make no apology for the lack of any sort of policy based reference in this post; the TV debates aren't really about policies, actually, this election isn't really about policies, in fact I'm pretty sure that party politics isn't about policies any more. That's the great thing about modern elections, vote for whoever you like, it's like getting a new postman; at the end of the day, you'll still just get bills and bullshit through your door every morning. Scptt not only are your reports on the reserve matches superb but so are your analysis on the TV Talent shows Some of the comments re Brown on here you can see that they could have been written before as they did not evaluate what was said and importantly in this sort of charade, how it was said. From what I have heard (as said the TV side was a farce), Cameron again failed to deliver the PM speech while Clegg consolidated. Sky behaved exactly how expected and they should NEVER be allowed to run one of those again. The question from Boulton was scandalous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The question from Boulton was scandalous which question Ian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The Telegraph headlines one Jon. It was straight from the Murdoch school of dirty tricks and right wing media. When a TV channel is not free and available to the majority of the public and worst still is run by a man who has declared his support for one of the main parties, then any impartiality disappears and last night proved the point. Sky really should be ashamed of themselves, but having seen how Murdoch pushes his shite Fox network in the states, I suspect that coming few days will see even worse from them in their quest to get Dave elected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The Telegraph headlines one Jon. It was straight from the Murdoch school of dirty tricks and right wing media. When a TV channel is not free and available to the majority of the public and worst still is run by a man who has declared his support for one of the main parties, then any impartiality disappears and last night proved the point. Sky really should be ashamed of themselves, but having seen how Murdoch pushes his shite Fox network in the states, I suspect that coming few days will see even worse from them in their quest to get Dave elected It's interesting that you now object so vociferously to the Murdoch empire backing the Tories, but had no such qualms during the previous 13 years when they gave such partisan support to Labour. Hell hath no fury and all that... Don't you think you're being just a wee bit hypocritical, Ian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 having to pay £8k to secure old age care my Nan had around £80,000 in savings .. to show for 76 years of working hard , saving hard and the desire to leave a little something for her family when she passed away (i don't mean she worked for 76 , btw , thats how old she was when she went into care) .. she's not rich in any real sense of the world , she had no house or any other assets Unfortunately for her a couple of strokes and being in a wheelchair for the last 6 years has meant she has had to live in a nursing home .. Her 80k is now down to around £6k so she finally gets to live in the care home for a slightly reduced rate that is deduced straight from her pension .. most of the other residents have lived there for free for the duration of their stay... whilst some have had to pay just as my nan has .. Now I believe (I've not really studied the proposal in full) that what Cameron is trying to put forward is that someone like my Nan in the future ends up paying £8k max rather than all her savings ... I don't think it's quite the same thing as you have to pay £8k to get old .. What i don't know at this stage is what happens if you don't have £8k ... but currently there are many old people who have had to sell their homes to pay for their care ...which is wrong imo .. this is one of the reasons I am not voting labour my gran (who was a spanish refugee) worked for nearly 50 years in this country, managed somehow on her wage to end up with no mortgage on her terrace in great barr, managed to still save and have a pension. When she was put into care (dementia) she had nearly £100k. She now has £8k. now i'm not saying she doesn't pay something towards her care, but over 90% of what she has saved? whoever thought that was a good idea is obviously very rich or retarded, or both. Parties need to work together to sort this out, because if it's not sorted out by the time I retire, I will certainly make sure the government sees as little as possible of my assets, however small. just out of curiosity, if you have a house without a mortgage, can you gift that to your kids as their family home? so they don't actually have to buy it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The Telegraph headlines one Jon. It was straight from the Murdoch school of dirty tricks and right wing media. When a TV channel is not free and available to the majority of the public and worst still is run by a man who has declared his support for one of the main parties, then any impartiality disappears and last night proved the point. Sky really should be ashamed of themselves, but having seen how Murdoch pushes his shite Fox network in the states, I suspect that coming few days will see even worse from them in their quest to get Dave elected It's interesting that you now object so vociferously to the Murdoch empire backing the Tories, but had no such qualms during the previous 13 years when they gave such partisan support to Labour. Hell hath no fury and all that... Don't you think you're being just a wee bit hypocritical, Ian? Absolute bollox Jon - and naughty on your part - I didn't think you would sink to the levels of some but hey ho A quick trawl back and you will see my comments re Murdoch - look at the way I said about him and Fox during the US elections - show me where I have said that I supported him and his views? The hypocrisy is yours mate and how you are now happy for him surely? It seems that in "Tory" land Hypocrisy has a different definition to the real world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 The Telegraph headlines one Jon. It was straight from the Murdoch school of dirty tricks and right wing media. When a TV channel is not free and available to the majority of the public and worst still is run by a man who has declared his support for one of the main parties, then any impartiality disappears and last night proved the point. Sky really should be ashamed of themselves, but having seen how Murdoch pushes his shite Fox network in the states, I suspect that coming few days will see even worse from them in their quest to get Dave elected It's interesting that you now object so vociferously to the Murdoch empire backing the Tories, but had no such qualms during the previous 13 years when they gave such partisan support to Labour. Hell hath no fury and all that... Don't you think you're being just a wee bit hypocritical, Ian? Absolute bollox Jon - and naughty on your part - I didn't think you would sink to the levels of some but hey ho I thought it was a fair queston to be honest. A quick trawl back and you will see my comments re Murdoch - look at the way I said about him and Fox during the US elections - show me where I have said that I supported him and his views? Seriously, did you object to Murdoch's support for Labour for the past 13 years? If so, when? The hypocrisy is yours mate and how you are now happy for him surely? Sorry, I don't really understand what you are saying here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 ridiculous comments Jon - show me where you have been against Murdoch and his support for Labour? Murdoch is / was a nasty piece of work. You are seeing that now, you saw it with Fox and Obama. The right wing led media of the Sun / Times / Mail / Telegraph / BBC (Robinson branch!) are being shown up time and time again with this election for what they do. The only one of those mentioned previously that "supported" Labour was the Sun I believe. You can't stop a paper supporting a party,but it does not mean they are right and acceptable. Mugabe has gone on record saying he wants Cameron to win, so using your criteria Cameron = Mugabe? So why are you now so happy to accept and welcome Murdoch, why do you support his comments? Show me examples where you have said he is not right etc etc ..................... Note: I don't expect you to do that, but am just showing you that your demand / request is confrontational and silly - and as I said more of what I expect from certain others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiganvillain Posted April 23, 2010 Share Posted April 23, 2010 Personal report card for last night, in alphabetic order. Brown, Started a lot brighter and better but tailed off badly near the end into standard Gordo mode. Cameron, Seems to be still searching for the glib phrase or slogan which will stick and win him the election, not performing to standard expected. Clegg, Came across as probably the most honest but struggled and will struggle to match the hype of last week Moderator, Not a patch on Alastair Stewart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts