Is there a good "Politics for dummies" site with some sort of a matrix of the main parties? I just want the info in layman's terms...
I know nothing about politics, and all this political talk just bores me to death...

You think this place is a democracy?

Labour - tax and spend spend spend. 99% of the time they spend money they haven't got.
Conservatives - Traditionally they're the low spending, tax cutting party. However there is no room for tax cuts at this election.
Lib Dem - Very PC and Pro Europe, not sure what else they stand for, probably why nobody votes for them.
BNP - Racist f**kwits
SNP - want Scottish independence
UKIP - Want the UK out of the EU.
Green - Eco-hippies with no sense of reality.
Monster Raving Loony - the only trust worthy ones out there. They may be mad, but they've no need to lie.

Check this out:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... efault.stm

There's a "Making it Clear" box on the right-hand side where you can choose an issue from a drop-down box and it will tell you where the main parties stand on that issue.

my take on things, why everyone hates labour so much is utter stupid, yes they brought us into a recession, but if you havnt noticed the entire world is in one.

LibDem here.

I'm leafleting for the local candidate (a nice chap he is) so I guess I'd better vote for him.

Besides which, my constituency is one of the 31 marginals being fought by the Tories with Ashcroft's dosh. Annoys me it does.

Also the Tories are against any form or bank regulation as well. So we will have a financial crisis in the future, but the bankers will still get their bonuses.

Cheers LU

No problem - I've also just noticed that it on the policy pages there are more drop-down boxes that let you change Party (for example swap out the Conservatives for Plaid Cymru).

They just throw money at stuff and hope it works. Often the money is wasted on point paperwork and inefficiency.


That was bodged to be sure, but at least they try to do things efficiently and they don't keep spending massively more than the tax system bring in. Even before the downturn when the economy was strong Labour was borrowing billions every year to fund unsustainable growth in public services. Labour don't recognise hard work or effort anywhere in there beliefs. They think that everyone should be the same regardless of how much effort they make. Where's the motivation? Labour say you should pay for your own retirement care if you assets are more than £20k. Why would people work hard to save for themselves if Labour are going to take it all off them and give it to those who couldn't be bothered to?



As I said earlier, Labour were guilty of massive financial mismanagement long before the global downturn. As far as I know the only years they haven't borrowed were their first two years in power when they stuck to Tory spending limits and the year when mobile phone firms paid billions for 3G licenses. Yes we'd all like a perfectly funded NHS, but we as a country simple don't make enough money to fund that.
I also hate them as they want to spy on everything I do. They're megolamiacs, they want to micromanage everything and everyone.
Plus they prefer to punish everyone rather than just the guilty. (Drink fuelled violence, dangerous dogs etc).

Neither does Labour:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... regulation

Second paragraph: "We need to change the way banks are regulated and internally governed, but neither the Labour government's proposals (pdf) nor the Conservatives' plans attend to this."

It goes back to the age-old problem of motivation, and nowadays the only thing that motivates most people is money. If you put someone in a job that offers no reward for excellent performance, why bother? Bankers may not be flavour of the decade, but they're still needed, and they still need to be motivated. Hit them too hard and the financial district of London could become a wasteland.

The problem is keeping them motivated but making sure that any bonus is linked to long-term performance rather than short-term gain.

+1

At the moment, I've not voted, simply because that's my current position, especially as I haven't actually gone and read any manifestos yet. Currently I am at the spoil the ballot level, but then again I'm really not a huge fan of Ben Bradshaw (our current MP), so I may end up voting to remove him rather than particularly for the party I want (especially as it doesn't seem to exist).

I am finding the whole thing very frustrating.

I think that the banks should be broken up. Then at that point I have no objections to what they pay the staff. The problem is now that the banks are too big and take too many risks. If they were smaller the directors would at least have an idea of what the banks were buying and investing in. If the investment banking were split off then we have no reason to worry about the pay of bank staff. If they go bust then they will not be bailed out by the tax payer and as such they can pay their staff what they want.

Well that's a delightfully eloquent way of agreeing with me and then continuing to vote Conversative on the basis of blame. Congratulations sir, you win a prize - another 5 years of bollocks from the other side of the house.