Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: beet1e on December 30, 2002, 05:41:02 AM
-
That is the sentence that resulted from the Major/Lamont legacy of Britain’s bungled attempt to join the ERM. In 1990, Maggie Thatcher was ousted from Premiership by her own party. Unfortunately, this once excellent Prime Minister had overlooked that her oft-quoted maxim ”Absolute power corrupts, absolutely” also applied to herself. Michael Heseltine initiated the leadership contest, and it’s too bad that he was displaced by the grey man, John Major. Heseltine would have been good, and I tended to favour his pro European stance. Instead, Major became PM and appointed Lamont as chancellor. Between them they instigated Britain’s ill conceived entry into the Exchange Rate Mechanism with the £ valued at too high a level, and one which could not be sustained by Lamont’s tweaking of interest rates. The result was that we got bounced out of the ERM ignominiously on a day which one newspaper, the Telegraph, dubbed Black Wednesday, but which the Times dubbed White Wednesday in view of the freedom from the shackles of the ERM and the high interest rates that went with it – at a time of the deepest recession since the 1930s. :rolleyes: The whole debacle cost Britain billions of £, a devalued currency and thousands of businesses bankrupt by high interest rates.
Not surprisingly, the popularity of Major’s government and of Major himself went down the tubes. The result was that “New” Labour under Tony Blair had time to consolidate, and returned to power in 1997 with the biggest majority any government has ever enjoyed in my lifetime. I had hopes – not high hopes, just hopes – of T Blair’s “New” Labour, but those hopes were soon dashed into a zillion pieces. Europe had become a divisive issue for the Tories, and Blair knows that. He also knows that by failing to commit to Europe (single currency etc.) he can keep the Tories divided indefinitely.
So what happened? Did we get the promised reduction in NHS hospital waiting lists? No. The waiting lists lengthened. For a time, they (read Frank Dobson) were able to blame the legacy of the Tories, but that time has expired. The price of road fuel has risen sharply (95 unleaded up from 57p to around 76p per litre) but are we seeing any improvement on the roads? No. Road development came to a complete halt last year. We’re paying more, but receiving less. Labour is fond of advising us to “use public transport”. There is no public transport alternative. The trains cannot cope with the passenger loading they have now, never mind if all driver commuters were to switch to public transport. Has crime gone down under Labour? No. It’s gone up! – largely, I believe, because of vastly over lenient handling of criminals.
Then we’ve had all Gordon Brown’s stealth taxes – at least 50 since Labour was elected – including abolition of mortgage interest tax relief, tax on property insurance premiums, abolition of the restitution of income tax deducted at source in lieu of personal tax allowances – the list goes on and on. Let’s not forget sleaze! Cheriegate – LOL!
Can we vote them out? Easier said than done. Just as in the 1980s, Her Majesty’s Opposition is pretty much nonexistent. The Tories are in terminal decline, and I’m unsure of the Lib Dems. Besides, Labour won’t hold an election till at least 2005, which they will almost certainly win, and the next opportunity to vote them out won’t come till 2009 – 12 years hard Labour. Even then, the required swing to the Opposition would be likely to topple Peter Snow’s swingometer.
What are we to do – any ideas? - Peter Snow's swingometer http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/655207.stm
- Labour's stealth taxes http://www.cps.org.uk/stealth.htm
-
Originally posted by beet1e
What are we to do – any ideas?
MOVE TO FRANCE!!
-
Well, I will not start a political debate. But I will say that I hope that things are worked out in the UK. I have been to the UK many times while stationed in Germany. I used to fly from Ramstein to Lakenheath on mail hops almost every weekend in 94. (Had a girl in Durum). For me, Europe is home. I am a US born European with German and Scottish ancestry. Don't get me wrong I love the U.S. I served in the Regular Army here for a very long time after all. But Europe is were my fore fathers were born. As Dorothy said "There's no place like home" In 15 years I will retire and I will return to Europe for good. I haven't decided if I will retire in Germany, or Great Britain. Next year, or the following year I will be traveling there to look into some property. That will be the deciding factor.
For all my Fellow U.S. born Europeans. (That’s about 70% of you) you should try to visit Europe at least once in your lifetime.
-
Did we get the promised reduction in NHS hospital waiting lists?
How could this possibly be accomplished? They may as well promise you rain-free weekends. Politicians don't have magical powers.
-
- Tumor! It is being looked into...
- TWOLF - yes, I take comfort that we have close links with Europe, and I can live in any EU member state. I make VERY frequent trips to mainland Europe - helps keep my sanity! lol I see you're from Chicago - I lived in Mt. Prospect 60056 for about a year, 1980/81.
- ra - I note your comments, but that does not alter the fact that those promises were made, and indeed formed the centre piece of Labour's election manifesto. NOW what they're saying is "Oh. The NHS is still in the doodoo, so if you want a proper health service, you're going to have to pay for it". Thus, Employee's National Insurance (a bit like US F.I.C.A.) will rise by 1p/£ in April. But... it won't help the NHS, as the money recovered by that increase has been earmarked for wage increases. No, it was a change made by T Blair to buy some time and to be seen to be doing something about the dire state of our NHS.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
[but that does not alter the fact that those promises were made, and indeed formed the centre piece of Labour's election manifesto.
What?
:eek: :eek: :eek:
You mean your POLITICIANS made promises and then DIDN'T KEEP THEM?
:eek: :eek: :eek:
.......just when you had me almost convinced everything was perfect over there.
Well, except for a few.. umm.. a bunch... ahhhh dozens... hmmm a whole lot of other things.
You want the state to do everything for you? You know Heinlein? TANSTAAFL?
-
where will it end?? heck... you may not even be able to trust the "home office" pretty soon... You might even wonder why your government is so concerned with making sure it's citizens are unarmed before long...
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
where will it end?? heck... you may not even be able to trust the "home office" pretty soon... You might even wonder why your government is so concerned with making sure it's citizens are unarmed before long...
lazs
yes...a conspiracy...
-
Toad & Lazs STFU and PO. This is a UK/Euopean thread.
-
Oh, my apologies!
May I suggest, however, that you then post this in a restricted, purely Euro environment? This BBS is frequented by folks from all over the world as I'm sure you've noticed.
Or at the very least, could you include a warning with your first post that all other unsophisticated and unwashed folks like us Yanks that are not from your country just keep our opinions to ourselves?
I mean, it's the least we could do. You've so often extended a similar courtesy to us.
:p
-
Toad & Lazs STFU and PO. This is a UK/Euopean thread.
Can I believe my eyes, or is this another "unwitting test of Americans" by the Brit genius?
Your advice for Americans has been freely flowing (and unsolicited) for some time now. I think you are ignorant of America and Americans despite living here, therefore your opinion of our laws means nothing to me. Now when the shoe is on the other foot you want Americans to stay out of it because we can't understand European issues? I agree- we should, so long as you don't go trying to ram your Euro-views down our throats (as you have).
Sadly I think the irony is completely over your head.
-
Me thinks the former landlords are bitter :D
-
OK, you don't have to PO, and you don't have to STFU. But it would help - lol. What I notice from Mr. Toad is that whereas he is well capable of an excellent debate, he sometimes lets his pants fall down by trashing threads. Seems that for Mr. Toad, having an audience of hooting Yanks who are only too willing to have him beat their drum is more important than adding original thought or making sense of any kind. :rolleyes: <
But Kieran! I am encouraged that YOU have replied. You see, for so long I was accused of writing boring threads etc., that when I posted this with a UK title, I thought the combination of that plus my name against it would turn most Yanks away. But it seems that Kieran at least yearns for more of my missives - even when they are not about America!
Nope. I never gave advice to Americans. I merely make observations. :) When the Yanks think they can deride Canada, or Britain, or France, well I just have to write a thread about the US as a reminder that America has not cornered the market in Perfection. :D Careful now, I am reaching my threshold as it's been a while since the last one.
-
America has not cornered the market in Perfection.
says who?:eek:
-
Beetle-
It seems to have escaped your elevated intelligence that I have not made the least comment one way or another as to my opinion on your political dilemma, given I don't live there and am not a citizen. I merely commented on your hypocritical request for Americans to stay out of a non-American issue.
Please, continue to backpedal as you wish.
-
Kieran :) OK, and thanks for reading. But...
It seems to have escaped your elevated intelligence
Ask your daughter to explain it to me. Is she 5 yet, or still 4?
-
She's six now, thank you.
Simple. You went off the handle describing how your elected officials have mislead you. You asked for comments. You got some, but when Lazs and Toad made comments you found unpalatable, you told them to PO, as it was a European issue.
Now, to that point your thread interested me little, except to give me a bit of humor that your Utopian paradise betrayed you. When you actually had the nerve to tell two Americans their views weren't welcome because it was a European issue, well... it seemed appropriate to point out you have yet to extend such courtesy the other way. You call your comments "observations", so I suppose Lazs and Toad were merely making "observations" as well. Anyway, it is silly of you to ask them to butt out. This hypocracy seems to be beyond your grasp to understand, I guess.
As for your current policital dilemma, I haven't the least interest or inclination to comment except to say I hope it works out.
-
Kieran - wrong - I would welcome Toad's views, not his roadkill. Same goes for you and Lazs.
This hypocracy seems to be beyond your grasp to understand, I guess.
Quite right. I don't know what you're talking about. Wait, did you mean hypocrisy? Or have you got your daughter typing for you?! I'm sure she's lovely. Post a pic of her.
-
May I suggest, however, that you then post this in a restricted, purely Euro environment? This BBS is frequented by folks from all over the world as I'm sure you've noticed.
Toad, many have been the times that teh same sentiments have been expressed, ony when Americans have asked Europeans to butt out :D
Still luve you tho. come now, sit on Santa's lap. There's nothing vaseline won't overcome.
-
Trouble is, I have problems with one side of an arbitration deciding what is roadkill and what isn't. You seem to feel that is your role.
My misspelling aside, you haven't really effectively side-stepped the point, now have you? Looks like you can dish it out, but can't take it.
And do you really want to play the spelling card? I can spellcheck your work as effectively as you can mine, but it is generally considered good BBS ettiquette to avoid such behavior. ;)
-
Actually, a "rolleyes" merely indicates an absence of originality to my way of thinking. Oh, they were useful when the BBS was new; we all used them. But they rapidly became overused and merely a cliche.
As for "trashing threads"..... I have a call for Mr. Beetle Pot; a Mr. Kettle on the line. Something about color, I believe.
"Observations?" Too funny. Being an amateur bullsh*tter myself, I can recognize a Master Bullsh*tter at once. Please do continue Master Beetle... I'm sure we'll all learn something about Bullsh*tting.
As for my "observations" in my first post:
1. I simply can't believe any mature adult member of an industrialized, politicized society expresses any sort of amazement or confusion when confronted with evidence that politicians don't do what they promise to do. Thus the first comment.
2. Assuming you understand the Heinlein reference, it should be quite obvious that the cost of the "welfare state" continues to go up. IE: Free Medical Care gets continually more expensive and as benefits are extended ever farther throughout society members it gets astronomically more expensive. The more doctors learn to do, the more new tests available and the more new patients to work on, the higher the costs will be. All well and good. However, TANSTAAFL. "There is no such thing as a free lunch."
Someone is going to pay, sooner or later. But pay they will.
So my second comment addressed the aspect that taxes WILL have to go up and will probably continue to go up. Because someone has to pay.
Now, this is a much longer version of what I expressed in my first post. Perhaps that post was too cryptic for our innocent little Beetle that's never trashed a thread and only offered "observations".
A true Master of the Chip Slinging he is indeed.
Tood-ly Tood-ly Toodles Toodles le pip (<-- possible French version?) Old Chap!
-
Or have you got your daughter typing for you?! I'm sure she's lovely. Post a pic of her.
THAT is low. You must really be on the ropes to have to resort to picking apart spellings, and refering to someone's child that way. You shouldn't do that... :(
-
Originally posted by StSanta
Toad, many have been the times that teh same sentiments have been expressed, ony when Americans have asked Europeans to butt out :D
Ah, but not by me, Dear Santa, not by me.
(And do be careful with that keyboard. Beetle will run a spellchecker all over your hairless self.. over and over and over and OVER again!)
Tell me... do you think the Somalis are attracted to your petrolatum covered midsection?
Lovely fishing trip there lad; I believe you swamped the boat with that cargo!
As for myself, alas... I save myself strictly for Allied Red Cross girls. Perhaps in your next life!
-
Mr. Toad - LOL! :) That's more like it. That's the Toad we know and love. :D BTW, I never expected Labour politicians to deliver promises. I have never voted Labour for that reason amongst others. As I said, I had hopes - but not high hopes.
I would not mind Labour's tax increases if we were able to see some tangible result from the spending of those funds. But we do not. Instead, we see money frittered away on cockamamey schemes like the Millennium Dome, and traffic schemes like the M4 bus lane between LHR and London. What was it - £650m ($1bn) squandered on that freaking dome? Richard Branson said in 1997 that it would come to be regarded as the biggest white elephant of all time. Richard, if you're reading this, I will give my time free of charge should you decide to campaign for Premiership of Britain, and I have a cold blooded friend who would love to fly your Boeings. ;)
Gunthr. I am shocked and appalled that you would make that interpretation of my request for Kieran to post a pic of his daughter. You're still pissed off at me for shooting you down in your 109 when I was flying an F4U a few weeks ago. I remember you re-upped from another field in an LA7, thinking you could chase after me and catch me. And you did, but you couldn't shoot me for toffee as I barrel rolled my way to the safety of the CV. I think one of my friends despatched you. :D A memorable fight.
Kieran - I meant nothing underhand by that "post a pic" request. Disregard, and sorry if you thought I was being a tard on that particular point. I was not. But I'm a tard on all the other points! ;)
Toad - je viens de faire pipi sur ton pied.
-
Je ne suis pas suprised.
C'est renommé que les Anglais ne sont pas la toilette entraînée
-
Originally posted by beet1e
That's the Toad we know and love.
C'est la personne pareile. Vous êtes seulement lent aujourd'hui; vous exigez loin plus d'explication pour comprendre un point simple.
Le Toodle-Peep! Je dois partir pour le travail.
-
beat1e you limey Eurotard! You got me there.
I am still mad. :p
-
Monsieur Toad :) I do believe you ran that through a translator. I tried that too, but the translator could not translate "faire pipi", which means to piddle. You're leaving for work now? How will I entertain myself without your posts? Oh, wait a minute, Tomato is here. :)
If you are flying, roulez doucement - as they say in France. (Roll sweetly) or drive/fly safely.
-
Did any other country in Europe have currency rated higher than the Euro?
AKDejaVu
-
Beetle.. it was all fine and dandy .. you guys slugging back and forth in the usual fashion...
but I have to draw the line at 'too much information'...
do whatever you like with Tomato..boiled, roasted, flambayed, whatever....
but please, don't tell us!!!
:):eek:
-
Well of course I did!
My last "formal" schooling in French was well over 30 years ago and I didn't practice the verbal parts enough to keep up over the ensuing years.
I can get the gist of written French most times but I can no longer keep up at all with spoken French. For myself, I still know enough to order in restaurants and bistros.
Toodle-peep! Toujours Toodle-peep!
-
Toad heh :). A typo is such a terrible thing, after all :D
As for the Somali thread - unfortunately that one wasn't a troll. If you do not believe me at face value, I can provide you with a telephone number to the prison where she should have started serving her 30 day sentence. My neighbors can confirm the story too.
It's situations like that one that makes you wonder why we aren't allowed to protect ourselves. I'm not even allowed to buy teargas or pepper spray or one of those zapper devices. And it took the police a full 10 minutes to get here when I called 'em when she was banging on the door the second time. That door is an el cheapo one that has been kicked in more times than a good worn soccer ball :/.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Can we vote them out? Easier said than done. Just as in the 1980s, Her Majesty’s Opposition is pretty much nonexistent. The Tories are in terminal decline, and I’m unsure of the Lib Dems. Besides, Labour won’t hold an election till at least 2005, which they will almost certainly win
I said that in 2002. It's now 2005, and we are expecting the election to be called for May 5. We'll know later today.
I just wish I could be wrong about something! If I could CHOOSE something to be wrong about, it would be the above. OK maybe the tories aren't in terminal decline, but I predicted in 2002 that Labour would win in 2005. Gawd, please please let me be WRONG about this. I don't mind if you make me be right about everything else! I'll even settle for a hung parliament.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Nope. I never gave advice to Americans. I merely make observations. :)
Wife to husband..."You're not going out in that are you? Those pants don't go with that shirt, and those shoes!"
Husband: "I have been dressing myself for some time now, I think I can pick out a pair of pants."
Wife: "It was just an observation, not advice."
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Toad & Lazs STFU and PO. This is a UK/Euopean thread.
Bugger off, go get your teeth fixed.
culero
PS :þ
-
Originally posted by beet1e
You see, for so long I was accused of writing boring threads
Perish the thought.
I know .....a.................fact.. ....................that..... .....
...........z.........zz...... ........zzzz...........zzzzzz ........
......Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzz
-
where will it end? next they will be saying that you can't tax your way into prosperity.
lazs
-
I'd be interested to know how you think things would be any different if the tories had won in 97 Beetle.
-
Originally posted by Tumor
MOVE TO FRANCE!!
:rofl
-
they have some good real estate deals in the French capital now. it's really a buyer's market. try some nice property on bordeauxstraat. :D
-
Originally posted by Momus--
I'd be interested to know how you think things would be any different if the tories had won in 97 Beetle.
I was pretty appalled by the John Major tory govt., and did not vote for them in 97. But times have changed...
-
You want to be wrong about something? Look no further than your first sentence in this thread.
-
So the election is on. Now the people of Ohio can retaliate and send letters trying to influence the UK election. :)
My instant guess is the Labour will win again because on the day people, presented with a choice of Michael Howard as PM or High taxes from the Liberal Democrats will shudder and vote Labour again.
-
It seems to have escaped your elevated intelligence
Elevated intelligence? As compared to what? Congrats Beet, another sucker born who mistakes your arrogance for intellectual puissance.
-
"In a research paper released last month, Christopher Smallwood, chief economic advisor at Barclays Bank, said Britain's economy is on course to become the biggest in Europe within 20 years, overtaking that of Germany.
Figures (pdf) released in July showed that the British economy roared ahead at the fastest annual growth rate for almost four years in the second quarter of 2004, driven by a recovery in industry.
Britain's gross domestic product increased by 3.7 per cent in the three months to June from the same period of the previous year, the strongest pace since the third quarter of 2000.
The figure compared with year-on-year growth of 3.4 per cent recorded in the first quarter of this year.
Unlike some of its main trading partners, the British economy skirted recession during the recent economic downturn and analysts said the latest data provided further evidence that a recovery is well on track.
"The UK is running full steam ahead," said Martin McMahon, economist at independent forecasters Lombard Street Research.
Growth was driven notably by increased activity in factories, with production output showing quarterly growth of 0.9 per cent, the strongest pace since the third quarter of 1999. Services output continued to grow at the same rate as in the first quarter.
And according to figures released earlier in July, the UK attracted the most foreign investment in Europe last year, when inward investment rose by 14 per cent. Investment and expansion projects by overseas companies created more than 25,000 jobs in 2003/4, with the number of projects rising from 709 to 811.
Almost one third of the projects were in manufacturing. Other sectors with growing investment included IT, software, electronics and biotechnology/pharmaceuticals.
The UK economy grew continuously throughout the global turndown that began in 2001, while many of the world's major economies experienced recession. The UK is now experiencing the longest period of sustained low inflation for over thirty years and unemployment is the lowest of the G7 major industrialised economies.
Projections from the 2004 Budget show that:
the economy is expected to grow by 3 to 3½ per cent in both 2004 and 2005, as forecast in last year's Budget and Pre-Budget Report;
inflation is set to remain low and close to the Government's target; and
the public finances remain sound and the Government is on track to meet its fiscal rules, borrowing is $68.25 billion (£37.5 billion) in 2003-04 and is set to fall, and in 2003 debt was the lowest of any of the G7 major industrialised economies."
I 'd say that means that in short we're doing OK.
How Beetle can say that Maggie was a great Prime minister escapes me. Squandered Oil revenue,on payiong benefit to over 3 million unemployed, totaly decimated manufacturing industry. destroyed Coal industry, and a growth in the F**k you mate I'm ok culture.
Oh yeah she was a dream. (dream *****)
On the downside the stupid thing this govt did was to get us involved in Iraq!
-
On the downside the stupid thing this govt did was to get us involved in Iraq!
You should post this stuff in the beginning so that people would recognize you for the idiot you are. Oh wait, you're skydancer, everyone knows.... never mind.
-
Oh dear :rolleyes:
So what about the real issue then? Who should we Vote for?
-
Well, good question. I don't know enough about Brt politics to give you a good opinion. I should give an opinion though, I mean everyone in the world has an opinion about what America should do.
I like Kate Beckinsale though, does that help?
-
Sure does she's an absolute babe. Especialy in that "Underworld" Film.
Well I'd be interested to hear an American opinion on our election. I think views from outside our land are actualy worth hearing ( as long as its not abuse) Broadens the mind to listen to others.
-
I'd love to pipe in, I have to plead ignorance, however.
Yes, I know ignorance hasn't stopped many from voicing their opinions. lol
-
Fair enough.
Go watch BBC news and enlighten youyrself. Probably has some relevance as our nation uis in the same boat as yours re the ME.
-
What in the heck is a Torie? Did I have some of that in Mexico?
Really,
All you can do is vote. Whatever country you're in get involved somehow. No I don't know how, but there has to be a way!
-
Tory!
Actualy A member of the conservative party.
-
Originally posted by Skydancer
How Beetle can say that Maggie was a great Prime minister escapes me. Squandered Oil revenue,on payiong benefit to over 3 million unemployed, totaly decimated manufacturing industry. destroyed Coal industry, and a growth in the F**k you mate I'm ok culture.
Oh yeah she was a dream. (dream *****)
Maggie's govt. reduced the top level of tax (set by Labour) from a swingeing 83% (with a 15% surcharge on "unearned" income) to a mere 40% with no investment income surcharge. "Ah", I hear you say. "Taxes only affect the rich". Wrong. Our high earners were leaving Britain in droves during the Labour years. That meant that instead of getting a substantial tax take from them, the govt. got nothing. That's why, after the Tories reformed our tax situation, tax receipts actually went up - because fewer people felt the need to domicile themselves overseas, out of reach of the taxman's claw.
The "F**k you mate, I'm OK" culture - Labour had failed in its pledge to modernise our industries, a pledge that Harold Wilson made in his devaluation speech in 1967. When Britain was eventually dragged, kicking and screaming, out of the 19th century and into the digital age, too many people still relied on loss making dinasaur industries. So when the plug was pulled on nationalised industries which were little more than charity organisations, there were problems. The heady days of trade union excess in the 1970s were like a big piss up. The penalty for that excess was a massive hangover in the 1980s. However, some of us were prepared to work to become proficient in the skill of our choice, and then made good at it. If that's a corollary of a FU society, then so be it.
Saying that things are OK, ie the economy is sound etc. is like the Brinks Mat bank robbers crowing that their personal finances are in good order - and so they should be after one of the biggest heists in British history. Gordon Brown's achievements have been funded by raiding the piggy banks of middle Englanders. But what does he care? They all vote tory anyway. Talk about a FU culture. :rolleyes:
Oh yes, and let's not forget the National Health Service. Remember how Labour promised us a fantastic NHS deal with reduced waiting lists and hospitals which would be the envy of the world? Under Labour, hospital waiting lists got longer. Eventually, T Blair conceded that "if you want a decent health service, you must be prepared to pay for it" (psst Tony - we're already paying for it) So up went national insurance - from 10% to 11% for an employee, and from 12% to 13% for the employer. But guess what? NHS hospitals didn't get better. We hear of operations being cancelled seven times in order to "meet govt. targets". We see that hospitals are NOT the envy of the world; they are filthy, and more people die from hospital infections than die in traffic fatalities on our roads. Labour simply threw money at the NHS, and much of it ended up in the toilet. In the NHS, there are now 3 managers for every 2 NHS beds. And while nurses' pay has risen 50%, NHS managers' pay has risen 70% - and that's where the money has gone. Squandered on meaningless bureaucratic and administrative functions.
Oh sure - things are just peachy - never been better.
:rolleyes::rolleyes: <--sometimes one is not enough
-
Beet,
Sure you are not describing California politics?:) I thought Socialism was supposed to save the world?????
-
Beetle, put your Daily Mail down for a second and answer the question. How would things have been any different if the Tories had won in '97 or in '2001?
-
:lol :lol
-
Originally posted by Momus--
Beetle, put your Daily Mail down for a second and answer the question. How would things have been any different if the Tories had won in '97 or in '2001?
I don't read the Mail; I'm a lifelong Torygraph reader.
How would things have been different?- We would not have had 66 new tax increases.
- We would not have a govt. the seeks to interfere in all aspects of our daily lives.
- We would not have had a govt. that increased fuel prices by such an extent that we had a fuel tax revolt, in 2000.
- We would not have had a government which, despite the massive increase in motoring costs and general taxation did not build a single inch of new roads in 2001 - the lowest amount of new roads built in Britain since the invention of tarmacadam in 1880.
- We would not be hurling bundles of cash at the NHS and yet seeing bugger all in return.
- We would not be seeing new houses and flats being built on land which used to be people's back gardens.
- We would not have seen our private pensions go from being the best in Europe to amongst the worst.
I'm not saying that the tories were worth voting for in 97 or 01. That's why I didn't vote for them in those elections. But I had some hopes that Labour had turned over a new leaf. But no, a leopard never changes its spots, or so it would seem. There's nothing new about "New" Labour. It's not even Old Labour dressed up. It's just plain Old Labour, with the old tax and spend formula - or in Gordon's case, spend and tax.
Out of interesst, Momus, in what constituency are you registered to vote?
-
My current constituency is Altrincham and Sale West in Manchester (Conservative). Before that, I lived in Feltham and Heston (Labour), before that in Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Labour), and before that Hampshire North East (Conservative). Quite what this info has to do with the discussion I'm not sure.
Now to look at your points in order:
We would not have had 66 new tax increases.
The UK is amongst the lightest taxed countries in the EU. The tax burden as a proportion of GDP has actually fallen since 2001. It was at it's peak in 1993 under the Conservatives.
We would not have a govt. the seeks to interfere in all aspects of our daily lives.
Can you give examples?
We would not have had a govt. that increased fuel prices by such an extent that we had a fuel tax revolt, in 2000.
The fuel duty escalator was introduced in 1993 by the Conservatives. Labour froze it in 2000.
We would not have had a government which, despite the massive increase in motoring costs and general taxation did not build a single inch of new roads in 2001 - the lowest amount of new roads built in Britain since the invention of tarmacadam in 1880.
Actually, the cost of motoring has been going down since 2000. Link (http://www.transport2000.org.uk/news/maintainNewsArticles.asp?NewsArticleID=138) . I guess the biggest road building expansion for a decade announced in 2003 passed you by too? Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3056636.stm)
We would not be hurling bundles of cash at the NHS and yet seeing bugger all in return.
There's plenty to reflect the increased funding since 2001. Just because the Mail, er I mean the Telegraph, isn't reporting it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Staff levels are up, staff moral is up, an increased number of conditions are now treated. Huge hospital building program. Waiting lists are down. (http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/PressReleases/PressReleasesNotices/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4106123&chk=Ntqv7u) This is in an organization rooted in the 1940s and largely starved of funding for 2 decades. I'm quite willing to wait until 2010 before making a judgement, unlike the ideologically driven Telegraph and its dogmatic view of the issue.
We would not be seeing new houses and flats being built on land which used to be people's back gardens.
There's a shortage of affordable housing. I have no sympathy for nimbyism. Move if you don't like it.
We would not have seen our private pensions go from being the best in Europe to amongst the worst.
Because world stock markets haven't been performing. This is the fault of the UK government? Hmm, ok. Are you advocating government intervention in the pensions market? You did say you were a Tory didn't you? :confused:
-
Because world stock markets haven't been performing. This is the fault of the UK government?
World stock markets have performed much better since 1997 than the British stock market.
In Oct 1997, just after Labour had come to power:
Dow (America) 6970
Cac (France) 2650
Dax (Germany) 3570
Ftse (UK) 4760
Today:
Dow 10,460
Cac 4100
Dax 4370
Ftse 4940
The FTSE has shown by far the smallest increase. The Cac and Dow have both risen by more than 50%, the Dax by 23%, the FTSE by less than 4%.
Are you advocating government intervention in the pensions market?
You are aware that Labour brought in a special £5 billion a year tax on pensions funds in 1997, aren't you?
From the Guardian:
'The present system of tax credits encourages companies to pay out dividends rather than reinvest their profits. This cannot be the best way of encouraging investment for the long term.' So said Gordon Brown in his first budget as he removed the tax credit that pension funds could reclaim on dividends paid by British companies.
Seven years later, his mantra is unchanged. Brushing aside criticism of the measure in an interview last Monday, he said it had been made 'to reward investment and give [companies] greater incentives to invest in the economy'.
Pension funds and their advisers were up in arms when Brown first withdrew the tax credit, warning that it would drive many funds into deficit and force others to increase their contributions. Seven years and £40 billion of lost tax credits later, these prophecies have largely come true: the financial position of our occupational pension schemes has deteriorated sharply and Brown's tax grab is seen as a contributing factor.
But has the change achieved what the Chancellor claims was its aim? Have British companies increased the amount that they invest in their businesses now that there is no longer any point in pen sion funds pushing for higher dividends?
If research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies is anything to go by, the answer is a resounding 'no'. In a paper due to be published shortly, it will show that there is no evidence of an increase in investment by companies following the removal of the dividend tax credit. The study compared the behaviour of companies affected by the change with those that were not.
'Their investment behaviour is exactly the same as before,'
'You can't blame the tax raid by Gordon Brown for the whole of the pension crisis but it certainly is a contributing factor,' said Farnish. Pension experts estimate that UK plc had a collective pension deficit of around £60bn at the end of 2003. 'If you add up the losses they have suffered since 1997, it is £40 bn in total - a significant part of the deficit in larger FTSE 100 companies,' said Farnish, although she admits that a number of other factors have contributed to growing pension fund deficits, including the stock market crash, falling interest rates, improved benefits for pensioners and an aging population.
-
I'll be voting Labour too.:D
Primarily because i think the tory's will do a worser job.
-
Originally posted by Momus--
My current constituency is Altrincham and Sale West in Manchester (Conservative). Before that, I lived in Feltham and Heston (Labour), before that in Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Labour), and before that Hampshire North East (Conservative). Quite what this info has to do with the discussion I'm not sure.
Like I said, I was just curious. The UK is amongst the lightest taxed countries in the EU. The tax burden as a proportion of GDP has actually fallen since 2001. It was at it's peak in 1993 under the Conservatives.
- Employee National Insurance UP from 10% to 11%.
- Employer NI UP from 12% to 13%, and the ceiling removed.
- Council Tax UP
- Stamp Duty UP - the rate on houses costing £250,000 - £500,000 was TRIPLED.
- Tax credit on dividends - cut
I could go on, but I don't want to have to type in all 66... The biggest blow for me was IR35, which redefines the terms for self employed workers - entrepreneurs - people about whom Labour does not give a shirt. They define those with one man limited companies as companies for the purposes of collecting corporation tax and employees for the purpose of collecting national insurance. I interviewed a guy in the High Street of a Berkshire town just a few Saturdays ago. His national insurance liability had risen by £13,000 PER YEAR under Labour since IR35. Great incentive to start your own business - NOT.
Our daily lives - Labour meddles in things which do not concern it. My brother is a retired maths teacher. He had a booklet which was sent from central government, telling him how he should conduct his maths lessons. WTF do government ministers know about teaching, as compared with teachers who have undergone 2 years teacher training and (in my brother's case) have 15 years of teaching experience? But this is the party that thought it would be a good idea to be in the business of running airlines... :rolleyes: The fuel duty escalator was introduced in 1993 by the Conservatives. Labour froze it in 2000.
True, so it's funny that the fuel tax revolt took place in 2000 and not in 1993. Do you think the fact that the pump price of fuel had risen by 50% in the three years that Labour had been in office might have had something to do with it? Actually, the cost of motoring has been going down since 2000.
Actually, Britain is (or was) self sufficient in oil, and yet we have the second most expensive petrol in the world, and the most expensive road diesel in the world - around 90p per litre. 18 months ago, I was able to buy diesel at 75p/litre, so the price has risen by more than 15% in that time. So if motoring is now cheaper, what costs have gone down? There's plenty to reflect the increased funding since 2001. Just because the Mail, er I mean the Telegraph, isn't reporting it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Staff levels are up, staff moral is up, an increased number of conditions are now treated. Huge hospital building program. Waiting lists are down. This is in an organization rooted in the 1940s and largely starved of funding for 2 decades. I'm quite willing to wait until 2010 before making a judgement, unlike the ideologically driven Telegraph and its dogmatic view of the issue.
I didn't say that funding hadn't increased. What I said was that we have bugger all to show for it. As for waiting lists being down, didn't you see the case of a woman whose operation had been cancelled seven times? Did you miss the news item whereby a woman (who had voted Labour) had switched to Tory because of frustration about not being able to get the right treatment for her son with special needs?
As for NHS hospitals - I'm voting with my credit card. I'm keeping my BUPA membership, even though it costs me hundreds of £ every year - because I don't want to have to wait 2-3 years for "non-urgent" treatment, should the need arise. I also want to minimise my chances of dying from a hospital infection. There's a shortage of affordable housing. I have no sympathy for nimbyism.
In the last 6 years or so, people have lost money on the stock market, and have therefore been investing in property, thereby driving prices up. Shoving blocks of flats into former gardens, thereby altering the character of the neighbourhood, is not the answer. Move if you don't like it.
Easier said than done. Labour has increased the cost of moving to punitive levels. I have only a 3-bed detached house in the Thames Valley, but when I moved to it in 2003, the move cost me a total of £15,300 - more than half of which was stamp duty. Because world stock markets haven't been performing. This is the fault of the UK government? Hmm, ok. Are you advocating government intervention in the pensions market? You did say you were a Tory didn't you?
I'm talking about Gordon Brown's raid on private pensions - to the tune of Five BILLION pounds per year.
-
Ok mate, I understand some of your complaints, but I don't have a lot of sympathy over the IR35 issue, which as far as I am concerned was the justified closure of a loophole that previously allowed contract staff to get away with paying far less tax and NI than their directly employed counterparts. The point still stands, we amongst the most lightly taxed nations in Europe as far as i can see.
Regarding the maths teacher, I don't really see this as interfering in people's personal lives. Schools are centrally funded and subject to this kind of direction. If the teacher in question was already doing a good job, he could probably just ignore such bumpf. Now, how about ID cards? Why aren't the Tories opposing these, given that they are supposed to be the defenders of individual liberties? I see stuff like this as much more intrusive than some daft missive sent out to school teachers myself.
NHS - the case of the woman who missed her operation 7 times was woefully misreported - she was not fit enough to undergo the surgery on at least some of the occasions - but I didnt see the Mail mentioning this part. ;)
The FTSE has shown by far the smallest increase. The Cac and Dow have both risen by more than 50%, the Dax by 23%, the FTSE by less than 4%.
That is undoubtedly the case Nashwan, but do you attribute this poor performance to the Labour government? I'm interested in how you think that works?
You are aware that Labour brought in a special £5 billion a year tax on pensions funds in 1997, aren't you?
Yes, I was aware that Brown abolished certain tax credits on dividend payments from UK equities and that this has had a certain effect on pension funds. I think this action may have been mistaken but equally I don't think that all the blame on the current pensions shortfall can be laid at Browns door by any possible stretch. Part of the problem is simple demographics, another part is the pension fund's overexposure to the UK stock market with its attendant bad performance since 2000. Also, pension fund "holidays" allowed in the 1980's have to take at least part of the blame. Also, last time I checked the projected pension shortfall was actually shrinking.
-
That is undoubtedly the case Nashwan, but do you attribute this poor performance to the Labour government? I'm interested in how you think that works?
A large part of it is down to the government.
The British Chamber of Commerce has claimed that the extra regulations Labour has loaded on them have cost over £40 billion to administer.
The tax changes Brown introduced (apart from the pensions one) had the result of increasing tax on dividends by 16%, resulting in lower investment in the UK stock market (much of the money has fled abroad)
According to the CBI, Gordon Brown's tax changes have cost British businesses another £40 billion (that's on top of the £40 billion in administrative costs caused by the increases in regulation)
In 1998 the World Economic Forum ranked Britain 5th in their world competiveness table, by 2003 Britain had dropped to 15th.
Labour's culture has always been anti-business, and anti-profit (from investment). That's why they had their stupid "un-earned" income surcharge, ie a surcharge on the returns on investment. The stock markets have declined in real terms under every Labour government Britain has had, and this one has not been an exception.
I think this action may have been mistaken but equally I don't think that all the blame on the current pensions shortfall can be laid at Browns door by any possible stretch.
About half to two-thirds is directly caused by the tax increases on pensions. The rest is down to the under performance of the UK stock market, which is again down to Labour.
Also, last time I checked the projected pension shortfall was actually shrinking.
Along with the projected benefits. Many companies have been so badly burned over the last few years they have abolished their final salary schemes, or closed entry to new members.
Ok mate, I understand some of your complaints, but I don't have a lot of sympathy over the IR35 issue, which as far as I am concerned was the justified closure of a loophole that previously allowed contract staff to get away with paying far less tax and NI than their directly employed counterparts.
The IR35 issue caused another decline in competiveness. Where companies before could employ contractors on short term contracts, which offered huge flexibility, much of that has now gone.
As to the use of IR35 to avoid tax, remember that the contractor does not have continuity of employment, sick pay, holiday entitlement, training etc.
-
This thread reads like a Common's debate!
:lol
-
Beetle,
I don't know if I'm excluded for commenting given that while I still hold a British Passport, I am a permanent resident in the US and the 15 year rule makes it impossible for me to vote in the UK. Please let me know if the "too Americanized" rule excludes me from commenting here.
I hate to admit it, but after the Coup D'etat that drove Maggie out of office, and then the tepid Major government I lost almost all interest in British politics. The philosophical differences between the main parties have narrowed to almost nothing at all, with all of the parties firmly committed to socialism and social liberalization in principle and only differing in the degrees to which they are willing to implement them. When I go back to the UK to visit family, I am forced to realize that culturally at least I have become a stateless person.
Of course I'm not arguing that the differences have been erased to the point that in local elections you don't still occasionally see the truly Looney Left red brigade candidates and the Fox-hunting old-guard Torries, but it seems to me that both major parties are largely rudderless and soul-less and neither has anything resembling a full-complement of statesmen.
But then again that does seem to be a reflection of our British culture, which appears to set short-term personal peace and prosperity as its only goals. Our pop-culture is a thin imitation of American pop-culture, and we seem to have been drinking deep at the Euro-well of cynicism, enui, and contempt for anything that smacks of "tradition" or moral certainty these days. Oh, and we all agree that we must roll our eyes and/or spit at the mention of "George Bush" or "neo-cons."
All of the bills I see introduced these days seem to be aimed at cheapening the culture, erasing the things that made us distinctively British as opposed to merely European, and of course erradicating the last vestiges of morality unless they are knee jerk restrictions aimed at mismanaging the economy or dealing with the increasing violence and anti-social behavior that goes hand-in-hand with cultural collapse. Meanwhile, the fastest growing religion in England is Islam and each month more and more Churches are closed down to be replaced by Masjids and Maddrassas.
Its just my ultimately worthless opinion, but the UK seems hell-bent on committing slow cultural suicide and at this rate the children of the builders of the "sceptred isle" (those that aren't sacrificed on the altar of convenience that is) are not going to have an inheritance. We have created a cultural vacuum and stronger cultures will inevitably fill that vacuum, especially because we no longer can offer anything worth assimilating into. "Come destroy your family" generally doesn't sell well with cultures that don't view that as inevitable or even necessary.
I'm saddened when I think of what the UK once was; a thriving global center of thought, art, religion, missions, science, trade, and vision, and then reflect on what she has become; decadent, cultureless, moribund, cynical, shallow, amoral, balkanized, and visionless.
What I pray for is revival and reformation in our country, and I pray that someday a party will arise from the ashes that stands for something other than tearing down the old order, promising hand-outs, cultivating envy, and complaining about the opposition. I long to see a party arise with the old spirit, vigor, vision and certainty of Pitt, Burke, Wilberforce, and Churchill. Will that happen? Well not without considerable change in the culture and not unless and until we realize that agendas that merely offer welfare, legal drugs, porn on demand, mandated sexual confusion, dumbed down schools, situational ethics, "animal rights," euthanasia, and laxer sentences have never and will never sustain a society.
- SEAGOON
-
Synopsis of the Above: Seems to me that Britain's problems aren't so much party political as much as they are philosophical and ethical.
We don't just need a change of government, we need a cultural sea-change, or all the political dickering will be to no avail.
- SEAGOON
-
That's why, after the Tories reformed our tax situation, tax receipts actually went up
Ironically, here in the US the libs cannot understand this. Lower taxes stimulate the economy on several levels actually causing more tax revenue. The overseas parrallel is amazing.
-
Well not without considerable change in the culture and not unless and until we realize that agendas that merely offer welfare, legal drugs, porn on demand, mandated sexual confusion, dumbed down schools, situational ethics, "animal rights," euthanasia, and laxer sentences have never and will never sustain a society.
Wow, a conservative! God bless you.
-
Hi Steve,
Well these days I'd be a small "c" conservative.
The British Conservative party is generally only conservative when it comes to fiscal matters (read some of the Brits on this board, you'll find that many if not most of them lean towards fiscal conservatism, lower taxation, etc. Keeping the money you earn is generally a matter of concern for anyone who works for a living these days) on most other issues, by American standards they'd be considered "moderates" and aside from some vague language about schools and immigration there isn't much in the 2005 Conservative manifesto or coming out of Michael Howard that a fiscally conservative American Democrat would get really hot and bothered about. They want a slightly stronger military than Labour, slightly better national schools, slightly lower taxes, slightly less immigration, slightly less regulation. Essentially its the same philosophy only with less of it.
For instance, they talk about eliminating paperwork and cleaning up the hospitals but never suggest even discussing whether Nationalized Healthcare itself should be scrapped.
On the social agenda side (which they seldom discuss anymore), they view the liberalization of divorce laws, the legalization of abortion, and the steady advance of the homosexual agenda as positive things. In fact when they do talk social order issues, they sound positively libertarian. Except on guns of course - sorry Laz - there they sound like HCI.
To be fair, I'm closer to their agenda and at least they don't view actually being British, straight, non-vegan, or being mildly patriotic to be "problems one should try hard to overcome." But even when I do agree with them, we've arrived at the same conclusions for entirely different reasons. In speaking with British Conservatives, I realize we may have some things in common, but worldview is seldom one of them.
So if you believe lower council taxes and slightly less regulation will save the UK, they are the answer. Not that they have much chance of being reelected in any event.
So, to the Brits on the board: do you think that the inability to get elected, despite the stumbles of Labour wil continue to drive the Torries leftwards?
- SEAGOON
-
I don't think the Tories have gone leftwards. Then again, I don't class "libertarian" as left wing. Since when has allowing people more freedom from government regulation been a left wing policy?
For instance, they talk about eliminating paperwork and cleaning up the hospitals but never suggest even discussing whether Nationalized Healthcare itself should be scrapped.
The problem is, even after Labour's disasterous management, the NHS is efficient. It provides very good treatment at very low cost.
The US has socialised healthcare as well, of course. Medicare and Medicaid will cost about $500 billion this year, compared to about £80 billion for the NHS in the UK (the US has about 4.5 times the population). (And that's not counting the "socialised" way hospitals treat people who can't pay, and recover the costs from those who can)
-
Your Politicians Lie...? :rofl
-
Seagoon! All are welcome in my threads. My current prediction for the election result is a Labour win of between 10 and 50 seats. I wouldn't have thought they could get 100. A hung parliament is even a possibility, and would be messy. An overall Conservative majority is remote. A Conservative win over Labour without having an overall majority is probably a nightmare scenario. They would lack the power needed to put through any of their proposals and might well end up with egg on their faces. If Labour wins, I don't see their administration running full term; I think we could be looking at some sort of crisis in 2007/2008 - just a gut feeling. The European referendum springs to mind...
Momus - I agree entirely with Nashwan's assessments, including IR35. The situation is this: Before 1975, agency workers (eg. self employed IT contractors as I once was) could take a contract in some distant town where they were not known, and open a bank account in a false name. They would invoice the agency, who would pay them in that false name and the contractor would bank the cheques. At the end of the contract, the contractor could cash out the account and close it, then return home and not pay any tax/NI. OK, that part was a loophole which needed to be closed. So in 1975, there were two Finance Acts. The second of these stipulated that agency workers must be taxed at source. But that meant that agencies would have to run a payroll department which none was equipped to do. The only solution was for a contractor to form a Limited Company in which he would be the sole director, and an employee of that company. The company would invoice the agency for the director's services, and would receive the full amount. It was up to the company to sort out the PAYE and to submit audited accounts to Companies House etc. If after receiving reasonable living expenses the company still had profits, the company could declare a dividend. Tax is payable on dividends, but not national insurance. This was fair enough because when operating as a company, there are expenses to be met, so it follows that the company should not be paying tax or NI on these business expenses. There was some corporation tax payable - about 10%. In my experience, the vast majority (99%) of contractors went the Limited Company route.
Then Labour decided it wanted to have its cake and eat it. IR35 was designed so that contractors would still have to pay corporation tax, but no dividends would be payable and no expenses allowed. They did this by moving the goalposts around - by redefining what constitutes being an employee. Basically they decreed that if you went to the same place each day, you were an employee of that client organisation. (But hold on a moment - a builder goes to the same site each day till a building is completed - does that make him an employee of the company building the houses?)
So, having pocketed ~10% corporation tax, the govt. then says that all monies coming through the company must be paid as "salary". But that means that the company must pay employer's NI at 13%, and the contractor must pay employee's NI at 11%!! AND... because of being classed as an "employee", the contractor cannot claim expenses like travelling/parking...
It's a farce, for all the reasons Nashwan gave. How can someone be an employee when there are no paid absences, no employee benefits (training/perks), no employment protection and, most importantly, no pension?
Let's look at the figures. For every £100 a contractor earns (at the 40% tax rate), £13 comes off for employer's NI, and about £10 comes off for corporation tax. That leaves £77, on which must be paid 40% tax and 11% employee's NI, leaving the princely sum of £37.73. Don't forget that many will be running monthly petrol bills of £350 (at least £250 of that is tax), and in parts of Greater London eg. Croydon, parking charges will be another £5/day. You can see from this that the overall tax/NI/expenses package comes to nearly 70% - and that doesn't even include accountancy fees. So if you still think that but I don't have a lot of sympathy over the IR35 issue, which as far as I am concerned was the justified closure of a loophole that previously allowed contract staff to get away with paying far less tax and NI than their directly employed counterparts.
and that paying 70% of your hard earned in tax is a fair deal, I don't think we have anything left to discuss.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan
I don't think the Tories have gone leftwards. Then again, I don't class "libertarian" as left wing. Since when has allowing people more freedom from government regulation been a left wing policy?
Hello Nashwan,
Sorry I haven't had time to respond to much of anything of late.
Lady Thatcher and other social conservatives noted the drift away from any sort of commitment to "traditionalism" in Conservative policy setting. This policy has accelerated by the determined campaigns of the "new conservatives" both in the party and the media to stamp out anything that might turn-off younger middle and upper class voters who would be in favor of fiscal conservatism but who had no abiding ethical moorings (aside from the consideration "what are my mates doing" and possibly "will this land me in jail?") whatsoever.
A simple review of Conservative party statements from the 50s to the current day will show a pronounced movement away from conserving what are often called "Traditional Moral Values" and what would be better described simply as "biblically derived ethics" to a position where they are content simply to endorse the current moral climate, and mildly oppose any legal actions to produce radical changes in that climate. So because abortion on demand is now the status quo, and the majority of Britons are "ok with it" the party endorses it. This is a radical departure from the principled leadership of the past that was willing to say that regardless of how many people endorsed certain things, they could still be wrong. Examples of this would be Wilberforce's rejection of slavery despite its popularity, and Churchill's rejection of "peace at all costs." Both were eventually vindicated, and by their steadfast leadership eventually changed the viewpoints of their society. Now it seems that instead of statesmen, all we have are demogogues who seek to figure out where society is going, and then jump out in front of the pack.
Libertarianism is neither liberal nor conservative in the traditional sense, its only ethic is at heart "let all men do what is right in their own eyes" or "If it makes you happy, how can it be bad?"
Well obviously the Michael Jackson trial is a case in point showing how what makes one man very happy can also be very bad and needs to be prohibited and punished.
Anywho, I'd go on but I'm out of time. Here's a thought-provoking article written in 2000 which noted the developing trend in Conservative circles towards social libertarianism (or libertinism) and the differences between that trend and historic conservative principles.
Pursuing permanent values: a moral framework for freedom (http://ccfwebsite.com/world_display.php?ID=40&type=article)
- SEAGOON