General Election 2015

[Seagull on the wing]

You look a bit daft putting certain words in capitals

Now that Ernest is funny....I don't have to explain watching your post with capitals....and spelling....but what law Ernest....what law....

All we are saying....give us an answer about the law...others can see the stupidity of your rantings...but you cannot answer....What law Ernest...put your mouth where the facts are...

 

[Ernest]

Now that Ernest is funny....I don't have to explain watching your post with capitals....and spelling....but what law Ernest....what law....

All we are saying....give us an answer about the law...others can see the stupidity of your rantings...but you cannot answer....What law Ernest...put your mouth where the facts are...

Do you think I'm a lawyer ? I know a lot more about disabled people & disabled peoples benefits than you so carry on making a fool of yourself with your rantings

 

[SeagullinExile]

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Do you think I'm a lawyer ? I know a lot more about disabled people & disabled peoples benefits than you so carry on making a fool of yourself with your rantings

First you quote about a law ..then say your'e not a lawyer...talking out the wrong orifice again Ernest...what makes you say you know more about disabled benefits than I do,having worked with them,bought up two disabled children,having a disabled wife who sadly has passed on now,you make these silly statements about law and can never back them up with facts,you just mouth off about you know this and that...prove to me you know more...you said I was breaking the law about offering a handicapped child the chance of seeing live football,and as I suspected you were just mouthing off and couldn't back it up.
Think you should keep to your 'Funny' post...with your'e alternative capitals....really funny...but boring.

 

[Ernest]

First you quote about a law ..then say your'e not a lawyer...talking out the wrong orifice again Ernest...what makes you say you know more about disabled benefits than I do,having worked with them,bought up two disabled children,having a disabled wife who sadly has passed on now,you make these silly statements about law and can never back them up with facts,you just mouth off about you know this and that...prove to me you know more...you said I was breaking the law about offering a handicapped child the chance of seeing live football,and as I suspected you were just mouthing off and couldn't back it up.
Think you should keep to your 'Funny' post...with your'e alternative capitals....really funny...but boring.

You're the boring one, if you remember more than me called you up on your offer to take a child and disabled wasn't mentioned so this is something you added on to make people feel you're hard done by.

As for disability and disabled benefits try being disabled yourself before you spout your shite.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

You're the boring one, if you remember more than me called you up on your offer to take a child and disabled wasn't mentioned so this is something you added on to make people feel you're hard done by.

As for disability and disabled benefits try being disabled yourself before you spout your shite.

Again so wrong.....
Again your talking sh1te...I am registered disabled with a transplant and a leaking heart valve...32 operations...have a mobility allowance,attendance allowance...disabled bay outside house...(sorry if your'e feeling envious but that is what you call facts)you really spout off without knowing the facts....are you disabled Ernest?...apart from your brain...I have often asked you to back up your ramblings and you haven't managed it once...law...disabled benefits...and if you go back to the thread of me offering a disabled child a free match...you will see I quoted 'disabled'. You open the gob before engaging brain...

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Tubthumper vs Buzzer was just a mild warm up.

 

[Ernest]

Again so wrong.....
Again your talking sh1te...I am registered disabled with a transplant and a leaking heart valve...32 operations...have a mobility allowance,attendance allowance...disabled bay outside house...(sorry if your'e feeling envious but that is what you call facts)you really spout off without knowing the facts....are you disabled Ernest?...apart from your brain...I have often asked you to back up your ramblings and you haven't managed it once...law...disabled benefits...and if you go back to the thread of me offering a disabled child a free match...you will see I quoted 'disabled'. You open the gob before engaging brain...

You don't want to be getting worked up if you have a dodgy ticker as you'll probably blame me for that too

 

[Seagull on the wing]

You don't want to be getting worked up if you have a dodgy ticker as you'll probably blame me for that too

No Ernest...wouldn't blame you for that...it is peculiar that you come out with all these statements and you are so wrong everytime...you are entitled to your view...as I am to mine...but all I ask is that you check your facts before casting doubts on anyones post...I'm sure deep down your'e not a bad person,after all we are ALBION supporters together...I've been a loyal supporter,now in my 57th year....so what is the point of trying this one upmanship...I will give any ticket I have spare to a disabled person ...yes I would ask the parent/carer for permission first....but not ask your permission...some things are more important than petty squabbles...Ernest,just carry on with your 'jokes'...some fans enjoy them....it's just not for me....my choice....if you can keep some of us happy,good on you.

 

[Buzzer]

I responded to a post comparing Milliband to Cameron - in that contest the Millibands means were most certainly modest.

You've added some Tory MP's v Labour MP's through history which is fine, but irrelevant to commenting specifically on Cameron and Milliband.

Well, yes I suppose it's all relative. Cameron's wealth is modest compared to Warren Buffett but compared to most people the Millibands were firmly middle-class and well off.

I don't think the comparison with Howard/Blair is irrelevant nor 'historic' nor a random Labour MP v Tory MP comparison. These two fought the last election but one as leaders so it's both topical and does show that generally there's very little between the two parties. And it's why I won't be voting for either.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

A month ago Labour was a point down, HT didn't start a thread then

Of course I didn't. Why would I do that?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

1. The economy is on the up.

For who?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-as-unemployment-rate-continues-to-fall.html

Who is really benefitting from this? As things currently stand people are finding it even harder.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You don't want to be getting worked up if you have a dodgy ticker as you'll probably blame me for that too

At the risk of expanding your two person spat, howabout you answer his question ? As far as I can see you've suggesting you know something but haven't provided any proof you actually do and you have then accused him of not knowing anything. Might I suggest you either put up or shut up because currently, from a casual observers point of view, you've made yourself look like a complete dick.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Well, yes I suppose it's all relative. Cameron's wealth is modest compared to Warren Buffett but compared to most people the Millibands were firmly middle-class and well off.

I don't think the comparison with Howard/Blair is irrelevant nor 'historic' nor a random Labour MP v Tory MP comparison. These two fought the last election but one as leaders so it's both topical and does show that generally there's very little between the two parties. And it's why I won't be voting for either.

You may find this interesting - http://www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

A highlight:
• A remarkable 34% of MPs went to fee paying private schools (compared with a national average of around 7%). Around 54% of Conservative MPs; 41% Lib Dems; and 12% Labour MPs went to fee paying schools. 20 MPs (19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem) went to Eton (6% of all Conservative MPs).
• 20 MPs (19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem) went to Eton, compared with 14 in 2001.
• The overwhelming majority of MPs are university educated and nearly a quarter (24%) went to Oxford or Cambridge (similar to 2005). Around 32% of Conservative MPs were from Oxbridge; 17% for Labour; and 26% for the Lib Dems.
• The occupational background of MPs continues to be ever more biased toward business and the ‘metropolitan professions’, particularly finance, law, public affairs, and politics. However, there are major disparities between the parties. For example, 3% of Labour MPs have at some point worked in finance as compared with 27% for Conservatives. A similar picture emerges in regard to business where nearly a third of all Conservatives and Lib Dem MPs have worked in business occupations. An alternative trend emerges with the public and voluntary sector, which is dominated by Labour MPs. Politics, law and public affairs are more evenly spread among the MPs. As to be expected most of the blue collar and trade union occupations are with Labour MPs.

 

[Glawstergull]

I am employing more people, increasing wages and starting a pension scheme because i can now afford to.

For who?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...e-as-unemployment-rate-continues-to-fall.html

Who is really benefitting from this? As things currently stand people are finding it even harder.

 

[Buzzer]

You may find this interesting - http://www.smith-institute.org.uk/file/Who-Governs-Britain.pdf

A highlight:
• A remarkable 34% of MPs went to fee paying private schools (compared with a national average of around 7%). Around 54% of Conservative MPs; 41% Lib Dems; and 12% Labour MPs went to fee paying schools. 20 MPs (19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem) went to Eton (6% of all Conservative MPs).
• 20 MPs (19 Conservative and 1 Lib Dem) went to Eton, compared with 14 in 2001.
• The overwhelming majority of MPs are university educated and nearly a quarter (24%) went to Oxford or Cambridge (similar to 2005). Around 32% of Conservative MPs were from Oxbridge; 17% for Labour; and 26% for the Lib Dems.
• The occupational background of MPs continues to be ever more biased toward business and the ‘metropolitan professions’, particularly finance, law, public affairs, and politics. However, there are major disparities between the parties. For example, 3% of Labour MPs have at some point worked in finance as compared with 27% for Conservatives. A similar picture emerges in regard to business where nearly a third of all Conservatives and Lib Dem MPs have worked in business occupations. An alternative trend emerges with the public and voluntary sector, which is dominated by Labour MPs. Politics, law and public affairs are more evenly spread among the MPs. As to be expected most of the blue collar and trade union occupations are with Labour MPs.

Cheers... that is very revealing but perhaps the last point is the most revealing and quite depressing. I don't get quite so hung up on where people went to school as some on here and I don't think anyone, not even Etonians can be blamed for where their parents sending them to school but what I do despair of is the large proportion of MPs who have absolutely zero experience in the real world. Too many are children of political dynasties or they have always, since Uni, worked in and for the political establishment albeit as a researcher, union official, adviser etc etc. And those who are from outside are, as you pointed out heavily drawn from law or 'high' business (we're not talking about working in SME businesses). It's great seeing ex-teachers, ex-soldiers, ex-nurses as MPs but they are so far and few between across all parties.

All the parties are as bad as each other in this respect and I truly believe it's this as much as anything that creates the disjoin between life in the real world and life at Westminster.

 

[Simster]

Absolutely right Buzzer. I really don't give a toss where people go to school, but I do expect people with real life experience to be representing us.

Career politicians more concerned about making decisions that benefit their careers rather than the country have let the people down badly for at least two decades now. That's why I'm disillusioned with all three of the traditional parties now.

Case in point, and something the Economist picked up on last week: Michael Howard in 1993 announced "prison works". No MP has really dared to disagree with him since. Except that using every single metric you care to choose, it's utter bollocks, and yet we still lock up 4 times more people than Germany and Holland. And that'll be because they're more concerned about what the red tops say (and therefore their own popularity) than what is good for the country.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Tony Blair....Labour....the richest champange socialist for the working man...the Middle East peace envoy...whilst the Middle East explodes in murder,turmoil,and uprisings....where is he...in one of his seven masions...or being feted by one of the Russian oil barons...does he care for the ordinary working man of GB....NO CHANCE. Gordan Brown...who sold our gold reserves at the lowest ever price...the government who left a note that there was no money left...Labour ruled by Unions...(and I was a Union man)...sorry if you vote for this lot then you must have a memory lapse...every time they get in we have to borrow,spend,borrow policies.
Look at France for socialist policies working....not!
Not saying the Tories are great...they have problems as well.../but in mind,the lesser of two evils....we have a lot of swing in Europe if we put the pressure on...we import more than we export to Europe,we control the banking...we should put pressure on for reforms...leave the ECHR and set up a British Court of Human Rights where we can control OUR laws,OUR borders.
Australian/American entry of Immigrants...no crimminals allowed in....but of course this is my opinion,my choice.

You are completely correct. Everything you right is true and accurate.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Absolutely right Buzzer. I really don't give a toss where people go to school, but I do expect people with real life experience to be representing us.

Career politicians more concerned about making decisions that benefit their careers rather than the country have let the people down badly for at least two decades now. That's why I'm disillusioned with all three of the traditional parties now.

Case in point, and something the Economist picked up on last week: Michael Howard in 1993 announced "prison works". No MP has really dared to disagree with him since. Except that using every single metric you care to choose, it's utter bollocks, and yet we still lock up 4 times more people than Germany and Holland. And that'll be because they're more concerned about what the red tops say (and therefore their own popularity) than what is good for the country.

Maybe Germans are better behaved and do not need locking up?

(joke)

 

[Titanic]

Latest YouGov/Sun poll: CON 34% LAB 36%, LDEM 10% UKIP 12%