The 'org Election Special Thread

[Luckypants]

Originally Posted by ranathari

Stuff about long term unemployed and JSA

Sorry don't buy that. To compare folk on JSA to those on unemployment benefits elsewhere is wrong. Governments who have been in power a long time like to massage the figures to make them look good, the previous Conservative government did it and this one does it. People are moved off JSA at the drop of a hat, onto long term sickness benefits, disability allowances, income support and a whole host of other benefits. Many people simply don't qualify for JSA, like those made redundant with a half decent pay out or school leavers. This makes JSA a useless tool for measuring unemployment. Making comparisons across countries is difficult because the counting systems are not the same.

There may only be around 200,000 people on JSA according to your source, but even Labour admit to there being in excess of 2.5 million unemployed. This reference (from just a quick Google) states that 'The claimant count for key out-of-work benefits was 1.54 million in March' - significantly different from your JSA only statistics. The same refence gives total unemployment at 2.5 million, so there is another million people not on 'key out-of-work benefits' but not working.

The key is to get people off benefit (of whatever name) and into work, thus going from being a leech to a contributor. How to do that is one of the hardest things for any incoming government, but it has to include cutting benefit for the work-shy IMO.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by ranathari

You know all these hundreds of thousands of people who you think exist and you believe are claiming JSA with no intention of work? They don't ****ing exist.

Ok there's the people on JSA. Not too many of them, well done Gordy.

Then the ones on disability for no reason.
Then the ones on bullsh*t training courses to nowhere because that gets the figures down.
Then all the other people on various "allowances".

The figures about JSA are massaged to within an inch of their lives, because there are so many ways to be unemployed without being 'unemployed.'

[Biker Biggles]

I dont buy these statistics either,but I also dont buy the blame Gordon Brown for everything nonsense either.The present government is just the latest incarnation of a ruling political class who have failed this country for decades,tory and labour.Whatever you think of Brown and his chums,dont fall into the trap of thinking Cameron will be any better.Look at Greece today.They have been forced to address the same issues that have been happening here sinse the 1960s and the results will ultimately be the same here too.

[yorkie_chris]

Didn't the last tory lot leave GB PLC debt free and with a bit of cash in the bank?

Where has labour left us?

[Biker Biggles]

No

[yorkie_chris]

National debt, gold reserves?

Never mind one word, tell me facts.

I find myself in the unhappy position of there being no chance of my constituency electing an MP from the party that I would like to see in government.

The dilema is:-
vote with my heart and efectivley waste the vote.
or
vote for someone that I dont really want as an MP.

My solution to this conundrum is not to vote for anyone!
Instead I will vote against the party that I least want to win!

Following that logic at 7am I will be voteing LibDem - my god have mercy on my soul!

[Bri w]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Ok there's the people on JSA. Not too many of them, well done Gordy.

Then the ones on disability for no reason.
Then the ones on bullsh*t training courses to nowhere because that gets the figures down.
Then all the other people on various "allowances".

The figures about JSA are massaged to within an inch of their lives, because there are so many ways to be unemployed without being 'unemployed.'

YC, you missed all the over 55's who are excluded from the figures becuase of 1 thing, their ?@#+ age.

Sorry, I very nearly put in lots of swearing.

I've had the pleasure of 3 periods of Labour rule and every single 1 of them has finished in an unmitigated disaster of a totally ?.';?.m~# economy. I remember 3 day working weeks, and hours of no electricity. I remember a mortgage rate of 15%, and pay rises of almost 40% in 1 year to try and keep pace with inflation. Labour spend on social reform at the expense of those who work, and those who generate wealth.

UK Plc is a business however unpalatable that might be. And businesses go under if not managed properly. Throw money at social reform without a thought to making the populace work for it and @#:./,/' borrow to do it on a dimishing income....Wow, thats clever!

I'm an ordinary working man, started out as a semi-skilled tech, then an engineer and now as a mgr. All the periods of stability for the country, of decent levels of taxation, of solid sustainable growth have not been under Labour.

Which ever way you want to tart it up with pretty ribbons and fancy labels this Labour Govt has done nothing different to any other one I've experienced. And if you think the Conservatives only look after the wealthy..... since when has the man in the street funded businesses, made them grow and provided jobs for others. There has to be someone who creates the climate for businesses to florish. The Conservatives, by aiding businesses create a climate for ALL to benefit with a growth in jobs, a growth in tax revenue.

Labour might create social justice, or their version of it, but it doesn't put food on the table and holidays abroad when its cost you your job to get it.

Oh but what about inheritance tax? The guy has already paid income tax on what he's earned and you want to tax his estate after he's died! Its a 'sick' tax, robbing the dead - and no my estate won't come anywhere near that level but that doesn't stop me thinking its 'sick'.

And relax, breathe 2,3,4.

I will be voting Lib Dems, won't make any difference in my constituency however.

How many MPs do you think my constituency has had since World War 2?

I'll tell you, a total of 2! Both Conservative. Current one (until tomorrow anyhow) was the MP who claimed for mortgage payments on a mortgage he didn't even have because it was paid off .

[tigersaw]

Agree with Seedy, its a tricky one.
The torys have stood a local candidate who's list of achievements are underwhelming, who's promises are dull and uninspiring.
The current lib dem is a thorougly decent chap, keeps his nose clean and has written to me personally in the past when I've requested his position on a matter.
So do I vote for the candidate, or the party?
Like everyone else, I MUST vote this time round, but there ought to be a box marked NOT LABOUR, so my vote is automatically cast towards whoever can slings them out the hardest.