danny

Well its official 6th May 2010 will be election day in the UK. Ive just got off the phone registering my postal vote. And i thought this was a subject very deserving of its own thread.

Im not going to comment on the education system as i dont know enough about it apart from both labour and the torys failed in respects of teaching me to spell. But tonight i went to see my sister and her mates at the pub they all went to uni and all have degrees. But apart from one who is a teacher none of the others have a job that really requires a degree. Do to many people go to uni. And are there to many people who go for the wrong reasons. Ie for a party rather than to truey help them in there career. Theres nothing wrong with just having a skilled job, which requires hand skills etc. Before anyone kicks off im not saying people soudnt be allowed to go to uni. Just do to many people go? There still has to be plumbers, mechanics, brickys, joiners, welders etc.

Em because thats how the free world works? But yeah hes should have been banned for life.

Think that about war if you want. But at the end of the day the law is on the side of the men in uniform because they send them there. not only that they pay me a tidy sum to go there and possibly kill someone. And the same for this topic the law is on the same side as me. People can download and say i dont want to pay its over priced etc etc. The simpl answer is if you dont want to pay then you dont have to have it. And if you are going to download it then you are going to start suffering for chooseing to do so.

It is when many of those students were coming to made up unis etc that dont really exist.

Because they have right wing ideas an thus must be racist and facist!! (yeah i agree with you more or less.) There are some racists in the party, but there ideals arnt all racist in principle.

Ok well in my eyes it is exactly the same thing. And this just sounds like someone trying to justify it. I see no difference. I noticed the comment about downloading a car just thought it was a daft comment and ignored it. You are still stealing the artists work etc. You have no right to own a digita copy of it. And in my eyes it is exactly the same thing.

Dont let people think thats me

I just dont see how you think its ok to have something for nothing. In the days of recording on cassetes it wast to the scale it is now. Yes it is theft but i think nobody worried about it. As the inpact was minimal. But now dowloads is impacting massivley on peoples buisness. Nothing is free in this life, and why should it be?

Yes it does. You can dress it up all you want but it just is.

Yeah 2 thanks. Infact no 3. I dont see what your problem is its a topic about the election. And trident is going to be a big issue for the country. And my home town even more so as the current vanguard class sbmarines and any future submarines will be built here. I mean here all the two partys talk about is the shipyard.

What your saying isnt wrong. But if were going to do it i believe we should do it properly rather than having this half arsed effort. Either have a proper nuclear deterant. Or dont have anythng as i dont think were achieving anything in having this idea that the libs dems have come up with. I dont know the figures for what trident costs a year to run. But lets say for arguments sake its £4bn. By cutting it from 4 to 2 submarines does not mean we will have £2bn. It has been proven over and over again that cutting millitary hardware does not reduce costs equaly as you still have many of the overheds no matter iff you have say 2 or 8 submarines. Now i think say £4bn for a proper deterant is good value for money when compared with say £3bn for a token effort. Basically we should either be in or out. Preferably in. But i would rather save £4bn a year than £1bn if thats whats important. A smaller deterant wouldnt do anything. As the most likely nuclear attack on the UK would be a dirty bomb from an islamic group. A deterant does not work for these kinds of bombs. But trident does protect us from states like russia and iran if they ever get them. The fact is nuclear deterants have been worth every penny. There have only ever been two nuclear attacks in history and thats down to the deterants that have been emplyed by other states.

I just dont see the point in having a half arsed effort. I would say that is a gosss waste of money as it does nothing to protect us. Funny enough if there was someone wanted to attack us with nukes why would they bother letting us know that they were going to do it. And thus let us get boats to deep water to realitate before they attacked us. Also the tomahawk idea is laughable really for reasons i cant talk about on here. And japan has no nuclear weapons after further reading. They have the ability to create them in less than a year if they felt the need. But only because they have a huge civil nuclar industry and weapon systems that cpould be converted if needed. But they see no need as they are well in the USAs pocket when it comes to these sort of things and japan is very important to the US navy strategically. Still having thousends of troops posted there from the navy and marine corps.

We havent been that reluctant though really. I mean i know loads of people who dont even question paying the cost to see a game etc. I think this has come to and end really were not going anywhere, might as well stop debating the footballer point neither of us are going to change our opinions.

No unofficial slaves in dubai. Yes but the clubs make what they can, fans pay the money. So why shoudnt the players get there share? Bollocks that they make money for themselves in the main. Everyone from alex ferguson to the guy who picks up the litter after the game is employed because of those 20 or so players. If the clubs are making the money what do you want them to do with the money? Give it to africa? Why not apply this to every buisness in the country. Is the fact that most footballers pay 50% tax and support all the services that were mentioned earlier not enough? I think that idea is flawed. Im not certain we need nukes. In my eyes they are something i want us to keep. But if the money isnt there the money isnt there. I think having a part time nuclear deterant is a flawed idea, if we are going to have nuke whats the point in having them if we cant realitate at a moments notice hence the deterant. And this sort of wishy washy idea just enforces why i would rather vote labour than lib dems there ideas always seem half baked. Also where did you get tha info about japan? Im pritty sure (and wiki is) that japan dosent have nuclear weapons. Japan still has very close ties to the USA with regards to defence. And thus dosent need them.

People on benefits do nothing an do get plenty. (and i dont mean people who hae genuine reasons to be on them). Footballers how ever by playing football which may not seem like a lot support an entire industry how many peope do you think man utd employ or are employed as a result of man utd. A squad of arround say 20 players create so much wealth and give so employment to so many people. So i dont see a link between footballers and people who make a career of claiming benefits. Ok and have you got any links to support this? Im not doubting you just puerly intrested thats all.

Yes but i mean what people in this country is it just footballers? Or many normal people. I bought a t shirt for £45 yesterday, should that be allowed? Should i have money taken off me and set to africa as that is a ridiculas amount to spend on something i could have got far cheaper? People spend money on all sorts of shit they dont need (look in the post your purchases thread) where is the line? And are there actual slaves in the UAE? As i did a quick search and coudnt find anything.

I earn more than i need to survive on, does that mean i shouldnt? I consier i live very comfortably (now hasnt always been this way although i have never been poor) does that mean i shoudnt be able to spend money on trivial things. Wheres the line?

I just dont get that its so communist. The clubs make money people might moan that tickts, shirts, sky tv is to expensive. But they still pay it. There not essential items. There not food or water. As far as im concerned its a very valid way to make money. If people dont like it dont pay it and the prices will drop when profits start to be hit. Supply and demand and all that.

I dont know how they can say this. They either want nukes or not. If not then fair enough thats up to them and they should say so. If they want nukes then its hard to see what other options we have but to have 4 nuclear submarines to carry the missiles. They were banding around the idea of only having three submarines. But that idea dosent work every defence review has said 4 is the minimum number of submarines needed. 1 on patrol 1 just back off patrol 1 in refit 1 in maintenance/training. Without having four there is no way of being sure we have a constant deterant. And without it being costant theres no point in having one at all. And submarine is the only system that really works for the UK. We havent got enough space to have a land based deterent. Apparently we would need an area about the size of wales. Airbourne launched nukes is a thing of the past as its to easy to shoot the planes down. And shipbourne woudnt be that much cheaper but would make it far easy to destroy than a submarine. If they dont want nukes just say. Otherwise come out with a decent new idea rather than 'not like for like' when there is not really another option if we are to have them.

I dont agree that bankers should get the bonuses for failure. But there are some banks that didnt get any direct aid. So i have no problem with tere bankers gettng any bonuses that can afford to be paid. But then theres the argument with the govenment owned banks that if you dont pay the bonuses are those staff going to leave that bank, to go and work for one that can pay bonuses. Then banks need these people to make the money, much like the country needs people who have the drive, ambition and ability to create money and jobs. Which is why i dont agree with taxing them to death. As for footballers if the club can afford to pay 100k a week then why shoudnt the footballer get it? At the end of the day thats what people pay to see. And clearly people are willing to pay the prices for tickets so i dont see an issue with it. I cant watch the videos as im on a dongle and the signal is crap. A brief idea what there about?

Dannyboy i dont know how things are in denmark having never been. But in the UK things cant continue as they are its clearly not working. It probably is unrealistic but i think it is a goal that should be worked towards. Someone once said there will be rivers of blood in the streets. (im not saying i wish this to happen) but i fear that one day this could happen. If the country was less divided there would be less chance of this happening. A few years ago now there were a fair few mass riots in the north west of england whites and blacks (strangely) on one side and mostly people from the indian sub continent on the other. Again i repeat i never want this to happen but i think there is a very large chance in years to come this could becombe a common scene. I mean we live in a country where there are still two waring communitys although it is far far better than it once was.

The quote i just find amusing it dosent mean i believe in what it says. Just as the charicter dosent in the program it is from. My bold forgot i had chaned it. I stand by the comment if you are not on our side then bassically you are sentanicing women in afghan to a life with virtually no rights. I would say thats pritty facist. Dont respond to this here tho as this thread is about the election PM if you want to discus it. Im not going to respond about the policing ad army issues as i cant be arsed with it in this thread feel free to PM me or MSN me though. And my opinion on taxation is why should people who have done well for themselves be punished? A flate rate of tax isnt even really a flat rate as its not like i am saying everyone should pay £5k a year. Rich people still pay more, i just dont see why the country should take the piss. The idea of a 60% tax rate its sickening to me. These people earn there money and get very little in return where as plenty of people put nothing in and get a great deal out.

I think dyson that theres a law in the works to stop MPs being non doms. Apart from that i dont think theres much you can do to stop it.

If you read my posts i say i dont think it is possible. But i just hate the argument to tax the super rich. In an ideal world i would like a flat tax rate. Im not saying they shoudnt pay as much for the system. But by the fact of being rich paying 33% of 100k is still more than 33% of 15k.