General Election 2017

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

General Election 2017

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 203 of 450 < 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 >

Stirlingsays 22 May 17 4.53pm
Originally posted by Hansy Not sure this is the same Chuka, care to enlighten? Chuka Umunna was one of the leaders in the vote of No confidence on Corbyn. And more of a Centrist, which I prefer. [Link] 'Labour MP Chuka Umunna focused his questioning on Google-owned YouTube, which he accused of making money from "videos peddling hate" on its platform. ' I will agree that he's more of a centrists.....May also attacks speech liberty as well and actually bought in our current over the top 'hate' laws. This isn't strictly a left/right issue. Edited by Stirlingsays (22 May 2017 4.56pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 May 17 4.53pm

Originally posted by Hansy

Not sure this is the same Chuka, care to enlighten?

Chuka Umunna was one of the leaders in the vote of No confidence on Corbyn. And more of a Centrist, which I prefer.

[Link]

'Labour MP Chuka Umunna focused his questioning on Google-owned YouTube, which he accused of making money from "videos peddling hate" on its platform. '

I will agree that he's more of a centrists.....May also attacks speech liberty as well and actually bought in our current over the top 'hate' laws.

This isn't strictly a left/right issue.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 May 2017 4.56pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50 Croydon 22 May 17 5.00pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Unless they were Irish Catholics of course. Of course, neither side really comes off as superior, because they all have blood on their hands. Republican or Loyalist, ultimately, it was unavoidable in picking a side in the Troubles to avoid association with violence, once the civil rights movement fell apart. Of course Corbyn was also right, to an extent, that peace could not be achieved without listening to the republican movement and granting it political legitimacy - What ever emotive issues people may have had about the Troubles. Its lazy politics to score points on person, rather than policies. In truth, the UK probably f**ked up its handling of the troubles from the start, and should have accepted the UN's offer to provide peace keeping duties. The point is that Corbyn did not really equally condemn both sides, he lent towards the anti-British factions. This is illustrated by his what he said in 1984, when questioned as to his motives for hosting two convicted IRA terrorists to tea in the House of Commons two weeks after the IRA Brighton attack, he said he was "a campaigner against imperialism in Ireland". We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]
Alert a moderator to this post

hedgehog50

Croydon 22 May 17 5.00pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Unless they were Irish Catholics of course. Of course, neither side really comes off as superior, because they all have blood on their hands. Republican or Loyalist, ultimately, it was unavoidable in picking a side in the Troubles to avoid association with violence, once the civil rights movement fell apart.

Of course Corbyn was also right, to an extent, that peace could not be achieved without listening to the republican movement and granting it political legitimacy - What ever emotive issues people may have had about the Troubles.

Its lazy politics to score points on person, rather than policies.

In truth, the UK probably f**ked up its handling of the troubles from the start, and should have accepted the UN's offer to provide peace keeping duties.

The point is that Corbyn did not really equally condemn both sides, he lent towards the anti-British factions. This is illustrated by his what he said in 1984, when questioned as to his motives for hosting two convicted IRA terrorists to tea in the House of Commons two weeks after the IRA Brighton attack, he said he was "a campaigner against imperialism in Ireland".

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 22 May 17 5.05pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I totally disagree. Dementia will soon be the biggest cause of death so it needs particular attention. I don't agree that people with more money should pay more toward their health care. Why? As long as those that cannot pay are helped then that is sufficient. This system will ensure that people have help when needed and not have to give up their home. It is a brave proposal which effects traditional Tory voters and one that acknowledges that tough medicine is needed to avoid a total breakdown of care for the infirm. Nor do I particularly, which is why a percentage of their income seems fair. I don't really hold with the idea of a super tax etc. A small reasonable taxation on the higher earners seems acceptable in the short term, until the issues of low income families can be resolved. Its kind of hard to find extra taxation revenue, when you're already spending 75% of your income on accommodation. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 22 May 17 5.05pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I totally disagree. Dementia will soon be the biggest cause of death so it needs particular attention.
I don't agree that people with more money should pay more toward their health care. Why? As long as those that cannot pay are helped then that is sufficient.

This system will ensure that people have help when needed and not have to give up their home. It is a brave proposal which effects traditional Tory voters and one that acknowledges that tough medicine is needed to avoid a total breakdown of care for the infirm.

Nor do I particularly, which is why a percentage of their income seems fair. I don't really hold with the idea of a super tax etc. A small reasonable taxation on the higher earners seems acceptable in the short term, until the issues of low income families can be resolved.

Its kind of hard to find extra taxation revenue, when you're already spending 75% of your income on accommodation.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Hansy 22 May 17 5.11pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Nor do I particularly, which is why a percentage of their income seems fair. I don't really hold with the idea of a super tax etc. A small reasonable taxation on the higher earners seems acceptable in the short term, until the issues of low income families can be resolved. Its kind of hard to find extra taxation revenue, when you're already spending 75% of your income on accommodation. Why not reduce the Government salaries and personal expenditure. MPs don't need a second house. - Another source of potential income.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hansy

22 May 17 5.11pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Nor do I particularly, which is why a percentage of their income seems fair. I don't really hold with the idea of a super tax etc. A small reasonable taxation on the higher earners seems acceptable in the short term, until the issues of low income families can be resolved.

Its kind of hard to find extra taxation revenue, when you're already spending 75% of your income on accommodation.

Why not reduce the Government salaries and personal expenditure. MPs don't need a second house. - Another source of potential income.

Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle Sydenham 22 May 17 5.12pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I totally disagree. Dementia will soon be the biggest cause of death so it needs particular attention. I don't agree that people with more money should pay more toward their health care. Why? As long as those that cannot pay are helped then that is sufficient. This system will ensure that people have help when needed and not have to give up their home. It is a brave proposal which effects traditional Tory voters and one that acknowledges that tough medicine is needed to avoid a total breakdown of care for the infirm. I agree it needs attention. The point I'm making isn't that those with more money should pay more towards their own healthcare, but should be paying in more to the system via taxation over the course of their lives, which contributes towards everyone's care (just like how the NHS works). To only make those with certain health issues or care requirements (which don't impact everyone and are often indiscriminate) pay seems contrary to the point of a welfare state. It seems bizarre that Tory voters are saying they want less state involvement and more control over their own money, but when they're asked to fork out for their own care they scream and shout that they can't then give that money to their kids. Having their cake and eating it too springs to mind. It's almost like they're saying they only want the welfare state so far as it benefits them but not so that it benefits those who need it most...
Alert a moderator to this post

CambridgeEagle

Sydenham 22 May 17 5.12pm

Send a Private Message to CambridgeEagle

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I totally disagree. Dementia will soon be the biggest cause of death so it needs particular attention.
I don't agree that people with more money should pay more toward their health care. Why? As long as those that cannot pay are helped then that is sufficient.

I agree it needs attention. The point I'm making isn't that those with more money should pay more towards their own healthcare, but should be paying in more to the system via taxation over the course of their lives, which contributes towards everyone's care (just like how the NHS works).

To only make those with certain health issues or care requirements (which don't impact everyone and are often indiscriminate) pay seems contrary to the point of a welfare state.

It seems bizarre that Tory voters are saying they want less state involvement and more control over their own money, but when they're asked to fork out for their own care they scream and shout that they can't then give that money to their kids. Having their cake and eating it too springs to mind. It's almost like they're saying they only want the welfare state so far as it benefits them but not so that it benefits those who need it most...

Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 22 May 17 5.17pm
Originally posted by Hansy Why not reduce the Government salaries and personal expenditure. MPs don't need a second house. - Another source of potential income. A lot do, or they stay in a hotel which won't be cheap over the life of a parliament. Unless the government buy a shed load of houses and then let MPs use them. the dignified don't even enter in the game
Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 22 May 17 5.17pm

Originally posted by Hansy

Why not reduce the Government salaries and personal expenditure. MPs don't need a second house. - Another source of potential income.

A lot do, or they stay in a hotel which won't be cheap over the life of a parliament. Unless the government buy a shed load of houses and then let MPs use them.

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 22 May 17 5.18pm
Originally posted by hedgehog50 The point is that Corbyn did not really equally condemn both sides, he lent towards the anti-British factions. This is illustrated by his what he said in 1984, when questioned as to his motives for hosting two convicted IRA terrorists to tea in the House of Commons two weeks after the IRA Brighton attack, he said he was "a campaigner against imperialism in Ireland". Both factions were anti-British, they were killing British citizens (and the British almost certainly were colluding with some loyalist terrorists to target inconvenient Republicans who were not terrorists). Its a mistake to consider anyone representing 'patriotism' or 'British' when they're murdering citizens. Personally, I don't like Adams, and find him a necessary evil. Much like I did with Paisley - and their hero worship by people on both sides of the divide sickens me. But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 22 May 17 5.18pm

Originally posted by hedgehog50

Both factions were anti-British, they were killing British citizens (and the British almost certainly were colluding with some loyalist terrorists to target inconvenient Republicans who were not terrorists).

Its a mistake to consider anyone representing 'patriotism' or 'British' when they're murdering citizens. Personally, I don't like Adams, and find him a necessary evil. Much like I did with Paisley - and their hero worship by people on both sides of the divide sickens me.

But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 22 May 17 5.20pm
I missed this recent news, probably already talked about, but what a fvcking bitch May is already turning out to be. I still don't understand how any decent-minded person can vote Tory. Must have their heads in the sand. "Almost one million children from poor backgrounds will lose the right to free school meals if Theresa May pushes through cuts in the Conservative manifesto, an educational think tank has warned. The Prime Minister announced last week that universal free lunches for infants will be stopped if the Tories win the June 8 general election, with free breakfasts on offer instead. The move will cost families around £440 a year for each child affected and is thought likely to save around £650 million a year, according to the research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI). EPI executive director Natalie Perera told The Observer: “Around 900,000 children from low-income families will lose their eligibility for free school meals under these proposals. Around two-thirds of those children are from what the Government considers to be ‘ordinary working families’. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 22 May 17 5.20pm

I missed this recent news, probably already talked about, but what a fvcking bitch May is already turning out to be. I still don't understand how any decent-minded person can vote Tory. Must have their heads in the sand.

"Almost one million children from poor backgrounds will lose the right to free school meals if Theresa May pushes through cuts in the Conservative manifesto, an educational think tank has warned.

The Prime Minister announced last week that universal free lunches for infants will be stopped if the Tories win the June 8 general election, with free breakfasts on offer instead.

The move will cost families around £440 a year for each child affected and is thought likely to save around £650 million a year, according to the research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI).

EPI executive director Natalie Perera told The Observer: “Around 900,000 children from low-income families will lose their eligibility for free school meals under these proposals. Around two-thirds of those children are from what the Government considers to be ‘ordinary working families’.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 22 May 17 5.22pm
Originally posted by Y Ddraig Goch A lot do, or they stay in a hotel which won't be cheap over the life of a parliament. Unless the government buy a shed load of houses and then let MPs use them. Oddly though, most people who have to work away from home have been excluded by HMRC from claiming accommodation as a genuine expense. Everyone, who has to maintain a home and a second location should be able to claim back accommodation as a legitimate expense if they have a receipt. It however should not apply if you're buying the place. Only hotels and rental (without that property becoming a capital gains asset). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 22 May 17 5.22pm

Originally posted by Y Ddraig Goch

A lot do, or they stay in a hotel which won't be cheap over the life of a parliament. Unless the government buy a shed load of houses and then let MPs use them.

Oddly though, most people who have to work away from home have been excluded by HMRC from claiming accommodation as a genuine expense.

Everyone, who has to maintain a home and a second location should be able to claim back accommodation as a legitimate expense if they have a receipt. It however should not apply if you're buying the place. Only hotels and rental (without that property becoming a capital gains asset).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 22 May 17 5.22pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Both factions were anti-British, they were killing British citizens (and the British almost certainly were colluding with some loyalist terrorists to target inconvenient Republicans who were not terrorists). Its a mistake to consider anyone representing 'patriotism' or 'British' when they're murdering citizens. Personally, I don't like Adams, and find him a necessary evil. Much like I did with Paisley - and their hero worship by people on both sides of the divide sickens me. But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on. And those lovely loyalists were threatening to take on 'their' Queen and Country not that long ago in a pique of toy throwing. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 22 May 17 5.22pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on.

And those lovely loyalists were threatening to take on 'their' Queen and Country not that long ago in a pique of toy throwing.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 22 May 17 5.24pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 I missed this recent news, probably already talked about, but what a fvcking bitch May is already turning out to be. I still don't understand how any decent-minded person can vote Tory. Must have their heads in the sand. "Almost one million children from poor backgrounds will lose the right to free school meals if Theresa May pushes through cuts in the Conservative manifesto, an educational think tank has warned. The Prime Minister announced last week that universal free lunches for infants will be stopped if the Tories win the June 8 general election, with free breakfasts on offer instead. The move will cost families around £440 a year for each child affected and is thought likely to save around £650 million a year, according to the research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI). EPI executive director Natalie Perera told The Observer: “Around 900,000 children from low-income families will lose their eligibility for free school meals under these proposals. Around two-thirds of those children are from what the Government considers to be ‘ordinary working families’. The argument being that the breakfast was of more benefit to people who work and have to drop kids off. So they don't lose free meals, they still get one, just not lunch. Also, I was under the impression that low income families and those on benefit will still get free lunches it just wont be a blanket provision. I could be wrong though the dignified don't even enter in the game
Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 22 May 17 5.24pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

"Almost one million children from poor backgrounds will lose the right to free school meals if Theresa May pushes through cuts in the Conservative manifesto, an educational think tank has warned.

The argument being that the breakfast was of more benefit to people who work and have to drop kids off.

So they don't lose free meals, they still get one, just not lunch.

Also, I was under the impression that low income families and those on benefit will still get free lunches it just wont be a blanket provision. I could be wrong though

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 May 17 5.27pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Both factions were anti-British, they were killing British citizens (and the British almost certainly were colluding with some loyalist terrorists to target inconvenient Republicans who were not terrorists). Its a mistake to consider anyone representing 'patriotism' or 'British' when they're murdering citizens. Personally, I don't like Adams, and find him a necessary evil. Much like I did with Paisley - and their hero worship by people on both sides of the divide sickens me. But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on. I totally disagree with your equivalency. Completely disagree and I also feel pretty strongly about it so it's just another area we don't agree on. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 May 17 5.27pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

But lets be honest, its got f**k all to do with his polices and politics now, 33 years on.

I totally disagree with your equivalency.

Completely disagree and I also feel pretty strongly about it so it's just another area we don't agree on.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 203 of 450 < 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

General Election 2017

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors