[brianthedog]

Originally Posted by Mecky

It beggars belief that some numpties are still defending Disasterous Dave and his cronies. Talk about banking a donky with a blue rosette on it at any cost, even if their lives and the lives of anyone in the UK depend on it.

So who would you back as PM? Mumbling Milliband? Calamitous Clegg? Ain't alliteration great?!

[I1L2T3]

brianthedog, we have nobody who is fit to lead the country in any of the parties.

That should be pretty clear.

[alchresearch]

Originally Posted by Mecky

It beggars belief that some numpties are still defending Disasterous Dave and his cronies. Talk about banking a donky with a blue rosette on it at any cost, even if their lives and the lives of anyone in the UK depend on it.

I'd say that most of the posts "defending" the coalition are reasonable and measured replies. It's all the anti-government posts which are childish and hold no merit or mature argument (as usual).

[brianthedog]

Originally Posted by I1L2T3

brianthedog, we have nobody who is fit to lead the country in any of the parties.

That should be pretty clear.

Increasingly I do agree. That said, I think we currently have the best option out there. Sadly, I doubt it will last the next election nor feel a better candidate will be on the cards by then.

[ricgem2002]

Originally Posted by Jim Graham

And a very selective one. Does your memory go back as far as Labour's top rate of tax at 98%? Since then successive governments have cut direct taxes and increased indirect taxes more. There was nobody more expert at it than Brown. He promised not put up income tax so he put up national insurance regularly. In his first year as chancellor he increased taxes by £7bn. He brought in the fuel duty escalator. He increased stamp duty and revalued housing to increase council tax. The list is almost endless. And he took £17,000 out of everybody's private pension pot to fund the overmanning, the lazy and the workshy of the public sector.

and what have the condems done since ?

[I1L2T3]

Originally Posted by brianthedog

Increasingly I do agree. That said, I think we currently have the best option out there. Sadly, I doubt it will last the next election nor feel a better candidate will be on the cards by then.

If it had to be a Tory in charge, David Davis is the pick of the bunch. Alas, we have a coalition and the LibDems would never accept him.

[Mecky]

Originally Posted by alchresearch

I'd say that most of the posts "defending" the coalition are reasonable and measured replies. It's all the anti-government posts which are childish and hold no merit or mature argument (as usual).

and if the shoe was on the other foot .....

[alchresearch]

Then I'm sure it could be done without name calling.

I certainly don't recall anyone using the equivalent of "disastrous dave" "condems" "nasty party" (other than "Bliar" and "Liebour" but I believe these were done by someone with no ties or support for any party) and so on when Labour were in power and threads critical of them were started.

[Mecky]

Originally Posted by alchresearch

Then I'm sure it could be done without name calling.

I certainly don't recall anyone using the equivalent of "disastrous dave" "condems" "nasty party" (other than "Bliar" and "Liebour" but I believe these were done by someone with no ties or support for any party) and so on when Labour were in power and threads critical of them were started.

Yeah yeah, what goes around comes around. Just remember where most, if not all, of the aggression is coming from on this site.

[Uptowngirl]

The coalition have banned clamping by anyone other than the proper authorities. The last lot just talked about it whilst the Scottish Parliament banned it.

[Magilla]

Originally Posted by Mecky

Yeah yeah, what goes around comes around. Just remember where most, if not all, of the aggression is coming from on this site.

The irony being that rather large proportion of it comes from you... so yes, remember, what goes around comes around!

[Harleyman]

The condems prevent unwanted kids

[chem1st]

I read this as 'condoms'.

The condems are a waste of money and stop you from having children because the cost of living and housing is too high.

Condoms on the other hand allow you to practise safe sex.

[twodeno]

Nothing

[green]

Originally Posted by I1L2T3

If it had to be a Tory in charge, David Davis is the pick of the bunch. Alas, we have a coalition and the LibDems would never accept him.

I quite like Zac Goldsmith, but since he voted for a EU referendum, the LibDems wouldnt accept him either.

[ricgem2002]

Originally Posted by Uptowngirl

The coalition have banned clamping by anyone other than the proper authorities. The last lot just talked about it whilst the Scottish Parliament banned it.

wow i can see that saving the world

[MrSmith]

They have slowed down the rate at which the country was going down the ban.

[ricgem2002]

Originally Posted by MrSmith

They have slowed down the rate at which the country was going down the ban.

hmm http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-recession-gdp

[MrSmith]

Originally Posted by ricgem2002

hmm http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-recession-gdp

GDP as little to do with the quality of life of the average Britain. Inflation makes everyone poorer but increases GDP, high house prices make housing unaffordable for many but increase GDP, high immigration increasing the population and puts strain on public services but increases GDP. High fuel cost affects everyone adversely but increase GDP, Increased personal debt and government debts increases GDP but it was debt that caused the crash, and the list goes on.

[wednesday1]

Originally Posted by MrSmith

They have slowed down the rate at which the country was going down the ban.

I think you'll find it was Labour who introduced the ban on hunting with dogs, if thats what you are trying to say, Smithy.