Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54

Thread: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,602
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 94 Times in 81 Posts

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    What they are arguing for is a selfish entitlement - that others should pay for your betterment. That's what's unfair.
    Banks get a lot of breaks for being selfish cretins. But giving them incentives is apparently better for the country.

    The government can advertise it this way - if you want your subsidy to continue, I recommend you keep quiet before we take away that subsidy.
    By this logic, if you take away the subsidy for art subjects only, then the art students will complain vocally, and ruin it for everybody.

    If you're on a course for four years, and pay back 30 a month with no commercial rate of interest incurred on your loan, you will have paid for your tuition 4 months before you turn 99 years old. But if you pay back 300 a month, you'll pay it off in only 10 years. This is assuming again, that interest hasn't made sure that by the time you've even found a job you owe more than you could ever repay in your life. Well, it seems to me that there is no point in getting a university education. You'll be worse off financially instead of better. What annoyed me most, was the idea that poor people could afford to get into a debt they could never repay. Just because the debt isn't upfront does not mean I'll be able to afford to pay it back. What's more, grades that are much better than mine are becoming worth less and less. They are using the future minds of the country to pay for the mistakes of the older morons who squandered the country's money while gambling. Next you'll tell me it's not the banks that lost all the money, it's those filthy poor people on benefits.

    In the end our debate will have to be settled by looking at the aftermath. Which probably won't be seen until reports of kids with debts they can't handle start to come in. Either way, I will not give the Liberal Democrats my vote even if they beg forgiveness. I'm voting for that incompetent Labour Party I hear people on about for the next few decades or so

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,183
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 53 Times in 47 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by Verion View Post
    By this logic, if you take away the subsidy for art subjects only, then the art students will complain vocally, and ruin it for everybody.

    If you're on a course for four years, and pay back 30 a month with no commercial rate of interest incurred on your loan, you will have paid for your tuition 4 months before you turn 99 years old. But if you pay back 300 a month, you'll pay it off in only 10 years. This is assuming again, that interest hasn't made sure that by the time you've even found a job you owe more than you could ever repay in your life. Well, it seems to me that there is no point in getting a university education. You'll be worse off financially instead of better. What annoyed me most, was the idea that poor people could afford to get into a debt they could never repay. Just because the debt isn't upfront does not mean I'll be able to afford to pay it back. What's more, grades that are much better than mine are becoming worth less and less. They are using the future minds of the country to pay for the mistakes of the older morons who squandered the country's money while gambling. Next you'll tell me it's not the banks that lost all the money, it's those filthy poor people on benefits.

    In the end our debate will have to be settled by looking at the aftermath. Which probably won't be seen until reports of kids with debts they can't handle start to come in. Either way, I will not give the Liberal Democrats my vote even if they beg forgiveness. I'm voting for that incompetent Labour Party I hear people on about for the next few decades or so
    I assume that because you didn't quote it, you accept the rest of my argument. In regard to paying it off, if you don't pay it off within so many years, it is wiped off. You won't be worse off financially because you only pay the loan back when you can afford to pay it back. It's not like a commercial loan - no bailiff is going to knock on your door demanding payment. You pay it when you can afford to so the argument that you will be worse off is absolute nonsense. If you get a University education, even at 9000 per year, you will be better off (assuming of course you get a good grade in a good course).

    Again, it doesn't matter if they can't afford to pay it back. That's the whole point - only those that can afford it, will repay it. So if you can't afford it who cares, it's not going to cost you anything, it doesn't matter.

    The banks are a separate issue and I have explained on this forum time and time and time and time and time and time again why the banks aren't only to blame but everyone is to blame - I even created a thread entitled are labour to blame. Check it out.

    If you vote Labour then you are voting for more cuts, incompetence, and a party of failure.
    The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency
    ~ Eugene McCarthy

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,602
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 94 Times in 81 Posts

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by LA View Post
    I assume that because you didn't quote it, you accept the rest of my argument.
    Most of what you said formed one general point, which is why I gave a response without quoting sections of it. I think we will continue to disagree about it even after we've finished discussing it.

    In regard to paying it off, if you don't pay it off within so many years, it is wiped off.
    I don't trust that to happen. You see, I expect the government to sell off my debt information to some other company, who will disregard the notion and take money from me after those so many years. What's more, what is the point in a degree if you're going to earn so little for so long?

    You pay it when you can afford to so the argument that you will be worse off is absolute nonsense.
    Whenever you earn more, the government takes it from you. You'll never have the money to live well. You'll simply get by as you were: staying poor.

    If you get a University education, even at 9000 per year, you will be better off (assuming of course you get a good grade in a good course).
    What of the people like me, the B/C grade students? Are they too poor quality to be worth educating them?
    Again, it doesn't matter if they can't afford to pay it back. That's the whole point - only those that can afford it, will repay it. So if you can't afford it who cares, it's not going to cost you anything, it doesn't matter.
    If you can't afford it, nobody cares. The debt will simply collect interest. If you can afford it, great, your money can pay for everybody elses mistakes. You stay poor. I don't want to earn less than 21,000. That's why I'm going to university. I don't see myself escaping the council estate that way.

    The banks are a separate issue and I have explained on this forum time and time and time and again why the banks aren't only to blame but everyone is to blame - I even created a thread entitled are labour to blame. Check it out.
    I'll give it a look when I have the time. I'm trying not to dwell on an argument about banks, but one of my points is that the government isn't merely trying to get people to pay for their education and cover their losses, they are trying to get them to pay for national debt (which I don't particularly consider students responsible for.)

    If you vote Labour then you are voting for more cuts, incompetence, and a party of failure.
    The only way I can think of where I can express my feelings to the current government is through voting against them. But voting for the opposition could well prove to be worse off for the country. I'm just so angered by the sheer volume of bullsh*t to come from the coalition however. Unless Labour come up with some really stupid ideas they consider "progressive", I'll be voting for them.

    To reiterate, I support considerable subsidies (a good-sized minority of the total cost of tuition, however students should pay for the majority, except when your party promised free education, then you'll have to compromise and leave it alone for being stupid and idealist) for university even in rather dire national financial prospects. I'll also support education being free if we have the prosperity and the regulations in place to cover it. I can't see more qualified people being a bad thing. Only when their degree isn't worth the cost. But then I admitted while I didn't like the idea I might have to accept course subsidy priority.

    Again, I appreciate the debate. I expect either students will stop going to university or they will go due to naivety and end up going to debt management services. This has branched off from the fact Lib Dems are traitors rather a lot at this point
    Last edited by Midas; 06-07-2011 at 07:55 AM. Reason: Included quote attribution

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,183
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 53 Times in 47 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by Verion View Post
    I don't trust that to happen. You see, I expect the government to sell off my debt information to some other company, who will disregard the notion and take money from me after those so many years. What's more, what is the point in a degree if you're going to earn so little for so long?
    Well that's the legislation - if after 30 years you have been unable to pay off the debt, it is wiped off. That has been legislated for, that is now law.

    Depends on the degree you take and what course. If you get a 2:2 in media studies, you have a hard piece of toilet paper - nothing more. If you get a 2:1 or 1:1 in mathematics... well let's just say you will have a very valuable degree.

    Hopefully by increasing fees those students who aren't really intelligent enough, who don't really want to go but are using it as a stall, will think twice about going.

    Whenever you earn more, the government takes it from you. You'll never have the money to live well. You'll simply get by as you were: staying poor.
    I agree that the government taxes people far too much but if you earn enough to pay the 40% rate of tax, you sir are not poor.

    What of the people like me, the B/C grade students? Are they too poor quality to be worth educating them?
    I meant get a good grade in a good course at University level. I dislike both A levels and GCSE exams and consider them worthless.


    If you can't afford it, nobody cares. The debt will simply collect interest. If you can afford it, great, your money can pay for everybody elses mistakes. You stay poor. I don't want to earn less than 21,000. That's why I'm going to university. I don't see myself escaping the council estate that way.
    If your dreams come to fruition then you will earn enough to live well, escape the council estate and pay off your University debt.

    I'll give it a look when I have the time. I'm trying not to dwell on an argument about banks, but one of my points is that the government isn't merely trying to get people to pay for their education and cover their losses, they are trying to get them to pay for national debt (which I don't particularly consider students responsible for.)
    I don't think so... The cost of educating a student is quite a lot. The money gained from students will cover the cost of Universities.

    The only way I can think of where I can express my feelings to the current government is through voting against them. But voting for the opposition could well prove to be worse off for the country. I'm just so angered by the sheer volume of bullsh*t to come from the coalition however. Unless Labour come up with some really stupid ideas they consider "progressive", I'll be voting for them.
    Well let's be clear about this. Labour are responsible for the worst budget deficit in decades. Their record of proliferation of spending has caused this country great pain and their grand solution to the problem, to cut slower and over a longer period of time, would result in more cuts in the long run.

    Why? Because over the course of their term, debt would increase leading to the ever mounting growth of debt interest. This debt interest will raise the deficit ever higher unless more cuts are made to compensate for that.

    In other words, Labour's plan is a cycle of indebtedness that would require far more draconian reductions in spending than the coalition are planning.

    To reiterate, I support considerable subsidies (a good-sized minority of the total cost of tuition, however students should pay for the majority, except when your party promised free education, then you'll have to compromise and leave it alone for being stupid and idealist) for university even in rather dire national financial prospects. I'll also support education being free if we have the prosperity and the regulations in place to cover it. I can't see more qualified people being a bad thing. Only when their degree isn't worth the cost. But then I admitted while I didn't like the idea I might have to accept course subsidy priority.
    I agree that primary and secondary education should be free. University education should not be free - students should be expected to pay for a service that primarily benefits them when they are in a position to pay for it.

    The problem we have at the moment, aside from funding, is this ridiculous target that 50% of people should go to University. It's a joke. 50% of the population are not academically capable enough to go to University. We should be settling with around 20% of the population going to University whilst moving towards German style education with strong colleges and vocational courses etc

    Again, I appreciate the debate. I expect either students will stop going to university or they will go due to naivety and end up going to debt management services. This has branched off from the fact Lib Dems are traitors rather a lot at this point
    Those students that will genuinely benefit will continue going to University. In America students pay upwards of $20,000 per annum for some Universities. Why? Because they recognise the huge investment and that it is worth it.

    If you think investing in yourself is naivety then you should question why you want to go to University.
    The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency
    ~ Eugene McCarthy

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,602
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 94 Times in 81 Posts

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Well that's the legislation - if after 30 years you have been unable to pay off the debt, it is wiped off. That has been legislated for, that is now law.
    Forgive my lack of trust in law and government. And my contempt at the prospect of earning less than 21,000 a year with a degree for 30 years. This clause will make little difference to people's lives.

    I agree that the government taxes people far too much but if you earn enough to pay the 40% rate of tax, you sir are not poor.
    I don't understand what you meant/how it is related.

    I meant get a good grade in a good course at University level. I dislike both A levels and GCSE exams and consider them worthless.
    If your dreams come to fruition then you will earn enough to live well, escape the council estate and pay off your University debt.
    I agree with these statements. Though I'm not really sure how I'd improve the prospects of either

    I don't think so... The cost of educating a student is quite a lot. The money gained from students will cover the cost of Universities.
    I thought much of the hardcore research that eats up a lot of the money was of more benefit to the country than to the individual university student, and that therefore the government should contribute significantly towards it.

    Well let's be clear about this. Labour are responsible for the worst budget deficit in decades... etc.
    I don't like how the coalition charged ahead with proposals without considering whether they are more costly than beneficial, administration of tuition fees being my example. I particularly didn't like hearing the kind of crap Nick Clegg and Vince Cable came out with. "Not a promise, a pledge." and "It's protests that scare students away not cost." Labour responded by saying they'd only make cuts that are cost-effective and I liked that idea. Apparently you have looked into it and found that their plans are far from logical. Can you share a few stupid ideas from labour? Because I expect us to disagree over tuition, but I'm interested if you can change my plans with regards to my vote. Bear in mind that even if labour suck at running the country, the message I want sent is that of my disapproval towards the lets-not-think-things-through coalition, and again, if you can offer alternatives to this that won't be of detriment to this country I'd be happy to have them. I seriously don't know how else I'd put my feelings across in a way that would be heard

    I agree that primary and secondary education should be free. University education should not be free - students should be expected to pay for a service that primarily benefits them when they are in a position to pay for it.
    I agree. But I think the government should offer an incentive to go. Even in the hardest times I will push for subsidies in university tuition, because I consider it to be investment on behalf of the country. Banks get breaks because they offer returns to this country and I see it as no different here. I think 66% paid by the student and 33% paid by the government is the best way to go ultimately.

    If you think investing in yourself is naivety then you should question why you want to go to University.
    I certainly do not wish to over-estimate the worth of my education. I'm studying at a low-grade-requirement university, in biology, a subject I'm not particularly interested in (so I don't expect to attain a first.) 9,000 a year tuition (which I don't think my tuition will even be worth) could ruin me financially if I'm not lucky with the job I get after my degree. I don't want to stay poor. I valued my tuition at 6,000 a year, and my views show that really. I'm going to university because I want more pay for less work. Any aspect I enjoy or any scientific contribution I make will be a bonus. And that way if I work a lot, I'll be paid a lot more, and I'll have all the freedoms which the money I have can buy If biology is killing me at university, I'll switch to environmental science and try that. If that doesn't work, I'll have to pay my way into an apprenticeship for a construction company

    Specifically, I've gone for biology because the engineering textbook is 1,000 pages of mathematics and if I don't enjoy it and apply myself I will immediately follow the path to failure and drop out (which I cannot afford to do). With biology, I can still scrape through with a 2:2 even if I don't find any passion for it. And if I do, need I call upon the possibilities of bio-engineering? So my plans aren't the most pro-active or inspiring, but they are the most sensible I could come up with during the few months consideration I gave them between stupid examinations.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,183
    Thanks
    105
    Thanked 53 Times in 47 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by Verion View Post
    Forgive my lack of trust in law and government. And my contempt at the prospect of earning less than 21,000 a year with a degree for 30 years. This clause will make little difference to people's lives.
    Well I don't particularly care if you don't trust government, that's your problem, but your "contract" isn't going to change.

    I thought much of the hardcore research that eats up a lot of the money was of more benefit to the country than to the individual university student, and that therefore the government should contribute significantly towards it.
    I was referring to the educating of students not the research facilities. I believe the government should be increasing funding to Universities but I also believe students should pay more for their education; anyone who refuses either doesn't understand the proposals or selfishly wants someone else to pay for them.

    Labour responded by saying they'd only make cuts that are cost-effective and I liked that idea.
    Yeah 'cus Labour can be trusted on the economy


    Apparently you have looked into it and found that their plans are far from logical.
    They have no plans - it's pure rhetoric. Or where they do give a "policy" it's nonsense - take the cuts issue, they don't want to cut anything but they support the need for cuts. Have your cake and eat it guys, you fat *******s.

    but I'm interested if you can change my plans with regards to my vote.
    I doubt my views on student tuition will change any students views. In my view a lot of students or would be students are being recklessly selfish over the tuitions issue. They want great education but don't want to pay for it - they want hard working taxpayers to foot their bill.

    This is one reason why I prefer America - students pay for their own education, there is no selfish demand for taxpayers to do it.

    I agree. But I think the government should offer an incentive to go. Even in the hardest times I will push for subsidies in university tuition, because I consider it to be investment on behalf of the country. Banks get breaks because they offer returns to this country and I see it as no different here. I think 66% paid by the student and 33% paid by the government is the best way to go ultimately.
    The taxation for the financial sector has increased quite rapidly so where are these breaks you speak of? Even under these proposals, students are still being subsidised.

    I certainly do not wish to over-estimate the worth of my education. I'm studying at a low-grade-requirement university, in biology, a subject I'm not particularly interested in (so I don't expect to attain a first.)
    If you don't mind my asking, what University?

    9,000 a year tuition (which I don't think my tuition will even be worth) could ruin me financially if I'm not lucky with the job I get after my degree.
    No it won't. If you can't afford it NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. You just have a crappy job with crappy pay, the tuition fees loan won't come at you in the dark.

    I valued my tuition at 6,000 a year, and my views show that really.
    How did you come to that valuation?
    I'm going to university because I want more pay for less work.
    If that is your genuine response then in my view you shouldn't be going to University. You are using it as a cop out. That's not acceptable.


    With biology, I can still scrape through with a 2:2 even if I don't find any passion for it.
    You expect to get a 2:2 and you are still going to University? Oh dear...
    The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency
    ~ Eugene McCarthy

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,602
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 94 Times in 81 Posts

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Well I don't particularly care if you don't trust government, that's your problem, but your "contract" isn't going to change.
    My aunt claims she is still charged and she's 40 something, but my argument can't advance on that without proof and to be honest, little of what she says is reliable. Sorry I can't really continue that debate

    I was referring to the educating of students not the research facilities. I believe the government should be increasing funding to Universities but I also believe students should pay more for their education; anyone who refuses either doesn't understand the proposals or selfishly wants someone else to pay for them.
    Why isn't research part of the education? I've been wasting all my life doing this AQA crap longing for the point where I'd get to use my mind and be useful. If research is a part of education, would you argue it should therefore not be subsidised?

    Yeah 'cus Labour can be trusted on the economy They have no plans - it's pure rhetoric. Or where they do give a "policy" it's nonsense - take the cuts issue, they don't want to cut anything but they support the need for cuts. Have your cake and eat it guys, you fat *******s.
    Point taken. I'll look into it and consider voting conservative or alternative.

    I doubt my views on student tuition will change any students views. In my view a lot of students or would be students are being recklessly selfish over the tuitions issue. They want great education but don't want to pay for it - they want hard working taxpayers to foot their bill. This is one reason why I prefer America - students pay for their own education, there is no selfish demand for taxpayers to do it.
    I don't think it should be left to it's own devices. I think people should be encouraged to go, and poor people should be given the opportunity to go. More qualified people is better for the country, at the cost of partial subsidy of university education. The amount of subsidy, even in the worst financial times should be significant. We will disagree on that, questioning the benefits of subsidies for university, or questioning the benefits of not doing so. Neither of us can prove it until we see how this current scenario turns out. If nobody goes to university in 2012, you can say students are either misinformed (as I will if university attendance is high) or that I was right. The Lib Dems have of course argued that the poor will be able to afford to go. But if I'm earning 21,000 or less for 30 years, I've not achieved much more than staying poor.

    As an individual I wanted a free education. It made sense of course. Self-preservation. But as a representative of a group, or member of this country, I believe we should make students pay for the majority *but not all of* their tuition. Offer to help people in getting their rewards for being qualified. They will thank you with a more productive country.

    The taxation for the financial sector has increased quite rapidly so where are these breaks you speak of? Even under these proposals, students are still being subsidised.
    where are these recent taxes for the financial sector that you speak of? I of course argue that the subsidies are of little worth to students.

    No it won't. If you can't afford it NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. You just have a crappy job with crappy pay, the tuition fees loan won't come at you in the dark.
    I don't expect them to take my head for not paying them back the loan. I just expect them to take my future. The moment I earn enough to support a life outside of government handouts the loan will come after me.

    EDIT: Information removed for future post.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,602
    Thanks
    110
    Thanked 94 Times in 81 Posts

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    I considered writing a full explanation of my position and motives, but then I found it's massive, so I'll just answer any questions as you ask them.
    If you don't mind my asking, what University?
    If you can speak in regards to the debate and not personally, not at all. I applied for 5 places, and received 2 offers. I have one at Bradford University - Engineering, and one at Manchester Metropolitan University - Biology. Bradford would require me to move away (costing money) and for me to enjoy the subject. Considering the maths involved as a necessity in engineering, if I don't take an instant shining to it I feel I will drop out and have nothing to show but debt. Biting off more than I can chew is not advisable. So I plan to take Biology at MMU.
    How did you come to that valuation?
    That is simply how much I felt my education in biology at MMU would be worth. I'd imagine some of the equipment they have to have (and maintain) is very expensive, but then it can also be used for research which is of more benefit to the country than to me as an individual. So that does not change my view on whether it should be subsidised :/
    If that is your genuine response then in my view you shouldn't be going to University. You are using it as a cop out. That's not acceptable. You expect to get a 2:2 and you are still going to University? Oh dear...
    For me a degree has to be economic sense. If it's going to cost more time for less money, I wouldn't do it. You want a degree just to benefit the world then that's your call. As for what I expect to get from it, I honestly have no idea. I thought I had another year to decide what I wanted to do but I didn't. I had to just throw some ideas out there at the best of my knowledge. I couldn't afford to wait. I don't think many students have any idea what they're getting into after their A-levels though. Their schools will tell them to go to university and that's what they'll do. I think they'll find themselves cut off from ever advancing financially because the moment they earn a decent wage their debt'll kick in. To "pay for their tuition" as you put it. Or to sideline a profit from the minds of the young, as I'd say.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    3,308
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 227 Times in 208 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?
    In a word, yes. I was a lifelong Lib Dem voter but I'll be voting Labour next - more or less as a protest vote. I doubt if I'll ever vote for the Lib Dems again. I'm still predicting the downfall of the coalition and the way I see it falling apart is by Lib Dem MPs deciding individually, or perhaps as a group, to end their backing of the coalition, and possibly to even cross the floor and join the Labour Party. They could say what MPs who change parties usually say - that it's their party that changed, not themselves - and with more than a little truth in this case.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,535
    Thanks
    650
    Thanked 218 Times in 183 Posts
    Blog Entries
    31

    Re: Are the Lib Dem leadership traitors to their cause?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperduck Quack Quack View Post
    In a word, yes. I was a lifelong Lib Dem voter but I'll be voting Labour next - more or less as a protest vote. I doubt if I'll ever vote for the Lib Dems again. I'm still predicting the downfall of the coalition and the way I see it falling apart is by Lib Dem MPs deciding individually, or perhaps as a group, to end their backing of the coalition, and possibly to even cross the floor and join the Labour Party. They could say what MPs who change parties usually say - that it's their party that changed, not themselves - and with more than a little truth in this case.

    Clegg and co had a choice, they may argue that the Labour brand was tired and tainted and that they had to make the other choice on the basis of the pre election promises made by Cameron to the electorate. In the mix, was the attraction of the power and the glory of ministerial posts in government. The glint in Vince Cables eyes during the negotiations of trying to form a coalition government as they went from one meeting to another told me they couldn't believe their luck at the outcome of the election result.

    Lets suppose we accept the Lib Dem argument about the choice they made. After over a year in office they can see that that all of the promises made by Cameron to the electorate have been broken.They were stiched up on the AV referendum by Cameron and the Tory and Murdoch press who had no intention of allowing it to be discussed in a neutral way.. They are now left propping up a right wing ideologically driven Tory party that has ceded nothing of consequence the LibDems and are being used by the Tories to drive through an excessive austerity program which constitutes an attack on the social fabric of Britain.

    After all of this they still hang on to their ministerial cars and salarys, hanging their heads in shame. If they want to regain any semblance of self respect they have to leave the coalition now, after the electorate and themselves have seen the real meaning of and aims of the Tory party, and vote independently with their their true Liberal consciences if they have any left. The Tories have been exposed for what they are a lying dishonest party of millionaires who conned Clegg and co to become their partners in crimes against society, if they did this they may still retain some loyalty of the Lib Dem voters who have been decieved.
    Advocates of capitalism believe : "The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •