I'm thinking of voting Liberal

[VectraMan]

I'd LOVE to see a LibDem government but I doubt it.

But wouldn't it be great if Labour suffer so badly in this election that the Lib Dems are the official opposition?

[Mich the Tester]

They're self destructing already and they aren't even in power.

[TimberWolf]

They're self destructing already and they aren't even in power.

That Times article reads like something from the Daily Mash, e.g.

Vince Cable was embroiled in a furious row today as front bench colleagues accused the party's most prominent member of formulating a policy that was "complete codswallop".

I look forward to seeing whether the Daily Mash improve on it

[wurzel]

For me the worst thing about labour has been the promotion of this obsession with health & safety and such like. Every time you open a paper or switch on a television you feel that somebody is wagging their finger at you. Frankly it pisses me off. Now, I thought maybe the Lib Dems might be a little more laid back, they are liberals after all, so I was surprised to hear that Liverpool Lib Dem council are proposing to put an 18 certificate on any film that features smoking in order to deter kids from taking up the habit. Sure, it may stop one or 2 from doing it but his whole risk adverse approach to life is becoming suffocating & IMO it ain't worth it. Think they've lost my vote there.

[TimberWolf]

I look forward to seeing whether the Daily Mash improve on it

Marginally

[sunnysan]

Who to vote for

They way I see it , a Tory vote is a vote against NL and a LibDem vote is a spoiled vote.

Unfortunately the political will exists to nail bankers to the wall in order to be seen to be rallying against inequality and poverty and in a more general light, taxation of wealth creation will be a vote winner as many people are struggling to see how such a disparity of wealth can occur and people that are used to feeling rich realise they are not and want to "punish" someone.

Unfortunately what people dont seem to get is one banker residing in the UK on 1 mill technically creates employment for 100 other people down the food chain, so punishing the super rich is effectively cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The problem with politicians are that they will do anything to get even one term in office, and in this case, woudl even turn the UK into a socialist backwater looking to places like Poland and Lithuania as examples of economic dynamicism.

As much as I dont like DC I will vote Conservative as I hate new Labour more and although VC may utter the odd trusim, they have no conceivable hope of being a credible political threat.

So with nausea and trepidation I will vote CP as I think they will change into what they really are after the election trimming the state more and intervening in business less.

[Addanc]

The problem that the LibDems have and have always had is that they're almost always morally right - they lost a series of elections in the 1990s by saying "erm, sorry to point this out, but taxes neeqd to increase".

Don't know if you have heard, but they have a troughing bell-end for leader.

You can poke tax increases where the sun don't shine; how about cutting the size of the Government/public sector down by about 75%; the more Government attempts to micro-manage peoples lives the more things get fooked up; how about people taking responsibility for themselves and their actions!

[Tarquin Farquhar]

Unfortunately what people dont seem to get is one banker residing in the UK on 1 mill technically creates employment for 100 other people down the food chain

No, he doesn't. His 1 mill may do that, but he himself doesn't. You are wilfully falling into the fallacy that were it not for the 1 mill banker, the 1 mill would not exist.

And his money would do at least as well if it didn't pass through his mitts first, because in order for it to get from him into the economy, 100 people have to do things for him that persuade him to pay them. Without the banker, the 1 mill would still exist but the 100 people could do something useful with their time instead of serving the banker.

[sasguru]

No, he doesn't. His 1 mill may do that, but he himself doesn't. You are wilfully falling into the fallacy that were it not for the 1 mill banker, the 1 mill would not exist.

And his money would do at least as well if it didn't pass through his mitts first, because in order for it to get from him into the economy, 100 people have to do things for him that persuade him to pay them. Without the banker, the 1 mill would still exist but the 100 people could do something useful with their time instead of serving the banker.

WHS.
The banker is an additional drain on the 1 mill and contributes very little value to having it created in the first place.
In the end cash can be created for goods and services - bankers fall in the latter but their added value doesn't justify what they get.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

For me the worst thing about labour has been the promotion of this obsession with health & safety and such like. Every time you open a paper or switch on a television you feel that somebody is wagging their finger at you. Frankly it pisses me off. .......it but his whole risk [sic]adverse approach to life is becoming suffocating & IMO it ain't worth it. Think they've lost my vote there.

The word you're looking for is "averse", but other than that I totally agree.