It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

democracy fail.

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Moving is not that easy with a disabled mum to look after.


And they all voted for war in Iraq pretty much...
All of that generation of MPs were wronguns.




posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: nonspecific

Moving is not that easy with a disabled mum to look after.


And they all voted for war in Iraq pretty much...
All of that generation of MPs were wronguns.


I understand but will you say any different about the guys you are voting for today and tommorow and will you ever step and start doing something real about it?

A future politician in the making methinks?



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: nonspecific

Moving is not that easy with a disabled mum to look after.


And they all voted for war in Iraq pretty much...
All of that generation of MPs were wronguns.


Well why vote for any of them then?


No excuse to vote for a war criminal for either party.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Tough luck indeed for single mothers using food banks.
Again, stop being a drama queen.
I ask why the 'single parents' you speak of are using food banks?
Income Support/JSA, Child benefit, Child tax credit, Housing benefit, and Council tax benefit have not been cut. I have many single parent friends on benefits and none of them are using food-banks, most are living quite comfortably enough on the reasonably generous UK benefits by making sensible choices about how they spend their money.
I say it again. Drama queen.



Some of the most comfortable off people I know are single mums, Regular payments plenty of food, council houses ect.

I'ts not the time or place right now but I have to laugh if thats the case as I certainly do not see it.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I didn't, I was too young to vote then.

That's why this time I voted for Miliband who lead the opposition that rejected a Syria invasion.
edit on 9-5-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

I haven't the time nor the audacity to become a politician.

I'll stick to activism.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: crazyewok

That's why I voted for Miliband who lead the opposition that rejected a Syria invasion.


Well good, unless the MP you voted for was one of the war criminals who voted for Iraq.


Remember you dont vote for a pm you vote for your mp.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Person I voted for wasn't/isn't an MP, she was fighting for a seat.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

He just pulled 'single mums on benefits' as the first emotive client group he could think of.
They are actually quite well looked after as far as I see from all my single parent friends on benefits.
Any claim that benefit rates for single parents are so low that single parents are forced to use foodbanks is bull#.
I worked a couple of years as a debt advisor for the CAB, and the bank account never lies...£120 per month on the iPhone contract for parent and kids when the same could be covered for £45 per month on pay as you go, £100 per month on a full Sky package, £50 per month for the new sofa when you could have bought a 2nd hand one for £50 and a £10 throw would make it look new... I could go on.

Charlie is bleating for those who mostly make # economic choices. There is no reason for a single parent to need foodbanks in the UK if they do not sign themselves up to needless expenses, or rubbish life choices.

I have MANY friends on benefits who are single parents, none of them use foodbanks. Charlie is being the typical Redski whinging drama queen where everyone is a victim. Glad I don't live where he does, people here help each other and stand up for ourselves.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Food banks, major cuts, privatisation, tax evasion, zero hours and a whole host of other nefarious Bullingdon proposals...


Well done Britain...


Bra-----Vo!!!



Since you put it like that, the outcome of the election is sounding better and better.

Food banks: helps those who need help*. Yep, need some of those

Major cuts: Bringing down unnecessary expenditure is a positive goal for any economy. Focus on building up employment instead by making this a business-friendly environment. Yep, need some of that as well.

Privatisation: The government shouldn't be running things. That's a job for the private sector. Most of the problems with privatisation have been caused by politicians sticking their oar in. Let's have some more proper privatisation, not this halfway nonsense we've seen up until now.

Tax evasion: OK, a little bit trickier, but favourable tax situations incentivise companies to base themselves in the UK, bringing employment with them. Rename "tax evasion" to "large business employment tax credits" and problem solved.

Zero hours: works great for some, not great for others. Why does the government think it needs to be sticking its beak into private agreements if both sides accept it? Leave zero hours alone! People should be free to make their own mistakes without running crying to teacher.

Nefarious Bullingdon Proposals: well, that rather depends on what the proposals are.

So yes, bravo Britain! A positive step towards a healthy country.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: nonspecific

Just attempting to inject some light heartedness into the proceedings
Nothing personal

Yes .... lets all shout and flail our arms about ... maybe a good brawl is in order
The Government will still be the Government in the morning though
Unless some ghost of Guy Fawkes has other plans afoot




edit on 9-5-2015 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Charlie, Charlie, Charlie...

Drama queen, drama queen, drama queen...


You cried to other posters that you want a "proper political debate" and as soon as I show up you're full of ad hominem and vitriol.


Grow up.




Also, you're a little premature on the "haven't been cut" jargon as well because Osbourne said late last year if the Tories win they'll cut £3b from benefits that will affect the lowest third income wise.


You'll not be able to sing the same tune for long if Osborne gets his way.
edit on 9-5-2015 by CharlieSpeirs because: Numbers mixed up!



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Kratos40

I walked the road on which they travel, but left it long ago. Yes, this is a Britain thread and needs to stay that way, but we must keep in mind that the British are our parent state and as they go so does their spawn. There is countless evidence to this effect as we all know. They perfected to Globe Raping that was invented by the Romans, just as we raised the level set by our Dear Mum tenfold. Watch Britain for it is coming here next and once again we will multiply it to our own end.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

A free and democratic vote this time around is laughable.

There was most definitely not a democracticly free vote. Firstly a large portion of people were "accidently" refused registration for their vote and most almost lost out because of a so called "mishap", reports of disabled people unable to get into the building and then told they couldn't vote outside of the polling station, but there are two more important things that proved this wasn't a free vote:

1 - THE THREAT OF THE SNP - The entire campaign we heard nothing from that woman, (I wont mention her name because to do so would invoke the wrath of the devil) but how her in Westminster would benefit the Scots and that she would hold Labour to ransom. That she would do everything she could to remove Cameron from office and would force Labour into a partnership either Coalition or vote by vote. This is an attack and for me personally, she should be seen as a terrorist. It is on her head that Cameron got back in because most people in the UK feared having her running the show which was what she threatened to do and with all the other parties doing so, including the BBC I can understand why they didn't vote Labour.

2 - FEAR - Most of the time we saw either of the leaders on tv they weren't talking about their policies or defending their record in government (something Cameron was very scared to do. Baby) they were trying to build fear against the other parties trying their best to put the fear of god into people, pointing out the mistakes of the other parties and not explaining their own policies or in Cameron's case, elaborating on what the 12 billion cuts to the welfare system will be.


My message is this: To the rich, well done You've got your boy in power you're money and the tax avoiding systems that you guys have are safe, after all how can you expect a man whose own father dodge taxes and then inherited that same money (or what was left) to go after people and companies who dodge taxes.

To the poor, beware, here comes David Cameron and the conservatives. They will take the NHS. The will take the money they will take your homes and most of all they will make sure you stay poor and in most likelihood will make you even poorer.

finally, my prediction of the next five years? Easy, a screwed up country where the poor of London are shipped out into the boarding counties and they dont have to ship us out in vans and cars and buses but instead just price us out, rising prices on food in London will just force the poor to either break the law and go to jail or we'll have to move.

(Some of you might say the above, is an over reaction to a vote. I say to that, you're wrong and right)



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: nonspecific

He just pulled 'single mums on benefits' as the first emotive client group he could think of.
They are actually quite well looked after as far as I see from all my single parent friends on benefits.
Any claim that benefit rates for single parents are so low that single parents are forced to use foodbanks is bull#.
I worked a couple of years as a debt advisor for the CAB, and the bank account never lies...£120 per month on the iPhone contract for parent and kids when the same could be covered for £45 per month on pay as you go, £100 per month on a full Sky package, £50 per month for the new sofa when you could have bought a 2nd hand one for £50 and a £10 throw would make it look new... I could go on.

Charlie is bleating for those who mostly make # economic choices. There is no reason for a single parent to need foodbanks in the UK if they do not sign themselves up to needless expenses, or rubbish life choices.

I have MANY friends on benefits who are single parents, none of them use foodbanks. Charlie is being the typical Redski whinging drama queen where everyone is a victim. Glad I don't live where he does, people here help each other and stand up for ourselves.


Will stop after this as going wel off topic but I would gladly swap with my ex with her 3 kids, 3 bed house and everything she gets out of it, I could live a happy life like that.

Going more off topic but a little more on I think that food banks are more about education than poverty.

Look at the figures for those who are in arrears with utilities and then see who's behind with there sky/broadband/mobile contract???

I'm ranting now but if you can't cook and can't put food before tv and iphones?

Yeah I'll stop now....



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

All my single parent mates on benefits have a decent life so maybe it must just be # in London.
I am calling bull# on your claims that single parents have a hard time in the UK benefits wise.
You are just acting the victim as far as I see it, even though you are not a single parent.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Dwoodward85

Please, I implore you.

Put down that copy of the daily mail!!!

I know you are new hear, but honestly, this is the second of your posts i have read and I have cringed reading it.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
I worked a couple of years as a debt advisor for the CAB, and the bank account never lies...£120 per month on the iPhone contract for parent and kids when the same could be covered for £45 per month on pay as you go, £100 per month on a full Sky package, £50 per month for the new sofa when you could have bought a 2nd hand one for £50 and a £10 throw would make it look new... I could go on.


I've written out my fair share of food bank vouchers. I feel tempted to say that the tiny proportion of those were the "genuine need" cases people seem to imagine when talking about food banks.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

Yep the majority are those who made # choices in their budget.
I will of course exclude people who have been 'sanctioned' but that is always another story.
Single parents who do not have iPhones and a full Sky package and/or a sofa they are paying for on HP do NOT require foodbanks to live.
Anyone claiming that in the UK is a drama queen.



posted on May, 9 2015 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

As a hard core Conspiracy Theorist, (as opposed to a Coincidence Theorist), I must second that. The Mail is as bad as the National Enquirer and does not even start fires as well.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join