Labour in 'lowest ever' poll rating

[TimberWolf]

Adolf Hitler never wanted peace in Europe?

of

[Marina]

Do you have "Made in Hong Kong" tattooed on your @rse?

If she does, it's in Braille at the moment by the sound of it

[Lucy]

You complain when you get insulted yet that is the only rational response to your silly ideas.

No. The problem is that your only way of arguing is by insulting people. You haven't studied polsci, you barely have an understanding of it, it is you who needs to stop posting.

[snaw]

The question you won't answer and still won't answer is, if you weren't taxed would you give to charities of your own volition?

The welfare state doesn't cause homelessness, but it has hardly cured it, either, and the people it has housed puts them in ghetto estates rife with crime, drugs etc If this is a great victory over poverty, given the vast amount that has been poured into it, I can't call it a success. I am suggesting that the status quo has failed.

Yeas I would give to charity, I do give to charity and I generally do something for charity every year.

Also completely besides the point, I stated and stand by it that in a civilised society we shouldn't have to rely on charity to provide at all.

I think you should go and read some history Lucy, there are much worse ghettos in the UK pre-welfare state than anything created by the welfare state. And crime, and alcohism etc etc.

[Lucy]

Yeas I would give to charity, I do give to charity and I generally do something for charity every year.

Also completely besides the point, I stated and stand by it that in a civilised society we shouldn't have to rely on charity to provide at all.

I think you should go and read some history Lucy, there are much worse ghettos in the UK pre-welfare state than anything created by the welfare state. And crime, and alcohism etc etc.

I think £139Bil (the amount spent by the UK on welfare every year) says it all really.

[sasguru]

No. The problem is that your only way of arguing is by insulting people. You haven't studied polsci, you barely have an understanding of it, it is you who needs to stop posting.

That is a poor response that doesn't address the issues made in my (and Snaw's) posts.
And do you think polsci really is a "science"? Same mistake that atw made with economics.
If you had studied a real (hard) science you would perhaps be trained to be more logical.
HTH

[sasguru]

I think £139Bil (the amount spent by the UK on welfare every year) says it all really.

Germany spends more per capita than the UK. What's your point exactly?

[DodgyAgent]

Weapons are made to kill people. They might deter someone from trying to kill you but it's not there primary function.

Adolf Hitler never wanted peace in Europe? That's news to me. Or do you mean peace in Europe once he'd conquered all the bits he wanted, and got rid of all the people he didn't like?

Who knows what Josef Fritzel wanted. Well you do, but you're great at assuming you know what motivates people.

One of your worst arguments yet DA, I know you can do much better than this.

Poor effort.

The point I am making snaw is that someone or something can be driven by any principle you like but it is how the delivery of that principle is applied that counts.

And with regards to Fritzel (just so you dont assume that I am assuming)

I always wanted to have many children. Not children that would have to, like I had, grow up alone, but children that would always have someone to play with. I had a dream about a large family ever since I was a little boy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3896492.ece

[DodgyAgent]

What has Snaw's giving or not giving have to do with anything?

And yes the welfare state is not perfect, but on the other hand far few people are dying of poverty related conditions than was the case 150 years ago when the average person could expect to live to about 40.
Are you really suggesting we go back to that world? Charities took care of the bulk of things then

I suggest you don't post any more. You complain when you get insulted yet that is the only rational response to your silly ideas.

My argument is that the welfare state has gone so far beyond its brief that it is now creating and perpetuating a culture of individual that is everything as bad as the people that it was supposed to help in the first place. And why? because in so doing it is creating a huge power base for socialists.

Get someone on welfare, ensure that they have no education of any worth, ensure that they do not become independent, strip away their aspirations and ensure that they are kept living with like minded people.. and there's your power base.

[Bagpuss]

Well exactly, and it also is indicative of not understanding that politics is not linear.

Linear thought that says those on Welfare benefits keep the Tories out of power.

Firstly not all on Welfare are there out of choice, not all on Welfare don't work, not all on Welfare are f eckless idiots. Not all on welfare haven't contributed to the system before they got into a mess.

Yes there are some scamming the system, but these people aren't politically aware, aren't stakeholders in society, they don't vote! How many are we talking? Less than 2 million people.
When did you last see a workshy 'chav' at a polling station?

The Tories are out of power because Labour courted the middle class voter as well as the working class Tory mondeo man/white van man/sun reading man as the media like to label them. Tribal voters hardly ever change allegiance, but the above groups do. They will win the Tories the election, what people do on Welfare is largely irrelevant. You just have a massive hangup on the Welfare state, but it's largely an irrelevance on who will win.

The stereotypical attitude you and your ilk have is the reason the Tories have been out of power for so long. Cameron realises he has to appeal (as well as the swing voters) to all backgrounds and especially the young. In the long run he has to find ways to help people on the bottom rung to help themselves, he's not going to motivate those people by dismissing them as something he trod in, like you do. He needs to address the high taxation of the low paid jobs, which forces people to remain on benefits. Of course the abolision of 10p tax rate was the an absolute gift in this respect, a realisation from the public that the only way to address poverty is low taxtion on the low paid.

The first time I saw Cameron on question time a few years ago now, he wasn't Tory leader, but he struck me as someone who could engage people from all backgrounds without patronising them. Of course since then he's had a few makeovers but now it seems his charisma is starting to appeal.