2015 post UK election discussion

[Tubey]

So if that EU Referendum does pass...

Does this fuel the fire for the Scots to leave the Union?

Doesn't just fuel it, they'd definitely leave. Instantly.

 

[Toffeelover]

The scots will be hit bad by leaving the eu. The fact that they might not get membership of the eu as an independant country was a major reaosn behind the no vote.

So yes, would be my answer to that.

It will be a good reason for them to push for a new vote which is their ultimate aim. Basically after last night they are independent.

 

[Tubey]

Just read an interesting thought - the £12bn in welfare cuts was never meant to be an actual "thing"; more as a bargaining tool to be lowered to rope in the Lib Dems again in a coalition, a sort of "see, we stopped the Tories doing this!" peace offering.

 

[davek]

At the end of the day more people voted in what they considered to be their own interests than voted in the interests of the needy in society.

This of course, is the usual way the world goes about its' interests, I'd hoped with our history of the NHS, benefits and social care we had a population that places a value on the common good.

It seems that is not the case.

I hope those who voted Tory are taught a sharp lesson in identifying with bullies. It's my wish that they're in the front line of any cutbacks and deterioration in services. They need their noses rubbing in a bit of reality. That's what you voted for; that's what you get, serf.

These people deserve it more than anyone who voted against the Tories.

 

[Tubey]

It will be a good reason for them to push for a new vote which is their ultimate aim. Basically after last night they are independent.

They're not - they're under occupation from another state effectively.

 

[Toffeelover]

Is it conducive to be an Evertonian and a Tory?

Discuss.

Who do you think BK voted for? and he is an Evertonian.

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

How is helping your fellow man, fellow members of society shooting yourself in the foot?

Surely society is better and richer for looking after those less fortunate than yourself? By society being better and richer then you yourself are better off for that.

There is huge value, economic and social, in raising the lowest standards of living in society. Who can argue with that?

Exactly! Given that there aren't anywhere near as many differences economically between the two main parties, the idea that people who have built up something they value right now would be taken away altogether & almost immediately by the labour party is quite frankly laughable at best, risible at worst.

The middle classes would've been barely affected imo. The rich would get richer - albeit at a reduced rate, while the poorest's rate of wealth creation would risen at a better rate than it ever would under the tories.

My guess is those on here who have voted tory aren't millionaires - but they've acted like they've got millions to lose by doing so. Fact is - they simply didn't.

 

[The Esk]

But your post Friend centred on self interest, I was just confirming that is the case in the majority of people, look after number 1. Hence my comment no one is going to be keen to hinder that self interest. Having said that there is a substantial number of people in the country who do care and it is nothing to do with Government, thankfully and I mean which ever lot would be in charge.

Maybe I did not express myself well enough, sure it is in everyone's self interest to vote for policies that look after the needy, rather than the self interest of a short term financial gain gained at the expense of the needy.

 

[davek]

Just read an interesting thought - the £12bn in welfare cuts was never meant to be an actual "thing"; more as a bargaining tool to be lowered to rope in the Lib Dems again in a coalition, a sort of "see, we stopped the Tories doing this!" peace offering.

Never meant to be there, maybe. But now it is there....

Dont waste your time thinking the best of that scum mate. The hammer is coming down.

 

[Toffeelover]

They're not - they're under occupation from another state effectively.

Already in the pipeline for devolution of more powers, as I said darn near independent and not just in name only. If Labour had won, do you not think they would have been making substantial demands of them?

 

[Garrick]

The scots will be hit bad by leaving the eu. The fact that they might not get membership of the eu as an independant country was a major reaosn behind the no vote.

So yes, would be my answer to that.

Because at least a shot at it is better than not at all, I presume.

As a complete outsider who doesn't have to deal with the BOOT OF EUROPEAN RULE ( ) on a daily basis, to me the UK leaving the EU seems like a shortsighted move.

Yeah, there are definitely some growing pains now, especially with the Eurozone and the floodgates of immigration being opened, but your economic competition in the world is a fully developed nation of 300 million and a rapidly developing nation of 1.3 billion.

Together, the EU matches or bests those two in almost everything. Separate, well, not so much.

 

[SNova]

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Never meant to be there, maybe. But now it is there....

Dont waste your time thinking the best of that scum mate. The hammer is coming down.

The seed has been planted.........

 

[Eggs]

....just checked the betting for next Labour leader, Chukka is relatively short priced followed by Andy Burnham. Yvette Cooper is a likely runner but I can't see that happening myself.

 

[davek]

Maybe I did not express myself well enough, sure it is in everyone's self interest to vote for policies that look after the needy, rather than the self interest of a short term financial gain gained at the expense of the needy.

Ha Ha Ha.

You're going to confuse these Thatcher children here with that one mate. They're looking at those words scratching their heads: "Vote for policies that look after the needy for everyone's interests? Is that esk feller mad?"