Wol

Probably not far from what is about to happen.

Grayling

If you want to make it a party issue......why did the Tories not change the pension rules when they were in power?

cliffyboy

Sorry, Grayling, I must be missing something. I thought my parenthesis made it clear that this was not a pro-Tory political party either/or response. Would it make you feel better if the sentence 'Something is rotten in the state of England and it begins at 10, Downing Street' finished with the words: 'irrespective of which party is in power'?

A plague on both their houses is what I say to you, and let me assure you, there'd be plenty of Tory hypocrites queueing up to fill the void, probably while at Church on Sundays.

But at least I give the Tories credit, even if it dubious, for recognisng that it is a dog eat dog world. Labour pretends they act as if it isn't.

Grayling

Not particularly your post but a there are many posters who have used this thread to have a go at the Labour party.

I was simply pointing out that the Tories did nothing about the pensios issue either.

cliffyboy

Well, fair enough, Grayling, I take your point, but for me anyone having political allegiances after they reach the age of forty plus, leaves me scratching my head in amazement.

You must have heard of that idea, or something to the effect, 'If you've not voted Labour before you reach thirty, you've got no heart, if you vote for them after turning thirty, you've got no head.' That piece of sentimental garbage has to have been coined by one side or the other because it presents such a conceited, egotistical and favourable view of political parties.

I prefer to believe that if you are commited to either side when you're older than forty or so, and having experienced election after election and government after government, you've got no brain.

Wol

You have a point but ignore the reality.

Most people have a philosophical political viewpoint but eventually realise *no* party completely espouses it: they have to go with the party that is nearest to their convictions, not the non-existent one that they agree with 100%.

cliffyboy

Sorry, Wol, but the reality for me is that both mainstream parties are thoroughly hypocritical - matter of fact, their supposed differences and political positions and philosophies aren't even written in stone, anyway. Look at the way Labour used to criticise Thatcher and her government's changes to labour and union laws, for example, but found them well worth keeping on the statute books when they won government.

And as for the Tories, as someone has well said, it's privatise the profits but when things go wrong, their user pays philosophy becomes socialise the losses.

Wol

>>And as for the Tories, as someone has well said, it's privatise the profits but when things go wrong, their user pays philosophy becomes socialise the losses.<<

May well be so - but in actual fact it was NuLabour wot put that into practice!

cliffyboy

Wol, I really do not have the slightest respect for either of the mainstream political parties.

The crude 'user pays' idea is riddled with typical Tory Party hypocrisy, as in suggesting it is simply a parent's choice to send their child/children to a top English Public School where other parents choose to spend their money on beer and the pools, I think it was when I was a boy, always not forgetting the ubiquitous Jaguar parked outside the council house. It was total pigswill then and it is total pigswill now, if only on account of those top Public Schools having their rates paid by Mr and Mrs Muggins. (Charitable Status, I think the jokers call it) The privatise the profits and socialise the losses, is little more than an extension of such Tory Party crap, as can be seen in the mess that was once British Rail, where a small group of privileged parasites now make money out of an infrastructure paid for by the taxpayer or like the scam that is the privatisation of water.

As for the belief or view that NuLabour, as it seems to fondly call itself, is itself guilty of such practices, well, by a country mile, I'm not the only who believes the Labour and Tory Parties are today basically different branches or off-shoots of the same 'power at all costs' coterie. Matter of fact, I've long believed these hypocrites, for all their cosmetic differences, fundamentally sup at the same table, like the pigs in 'Animal Farm'.

aasmith1957

we moved back to scotland in november,me 52 and hubby 54.we knew we wouldnt get an australian pension if we stay in uk up to retirement age.read it on ato site.only get it if we reside in australia 2 years before retirement.worked in australia paying taxes etc for 18 years dont matter.we will actually have the 30 years in uk paying taxes etc to recieve full uk pension i think.(goalposts will have been moved by then a few times i recon).
as i said in a previous thread we talked about this years ago and my son who is almost 32 wont get an australian pension as they are/were trying to change the laws about old age pensions.the gov wants you to fund your own retirement.
i am sure by the time we retire here or in australia that pensions will have been phased out.they are only going to be for the needy or for those who have contibuted nothing in their life time.

will be real lucky if i last until next week the way the weather is today,bloody freezing.watching the sea and its really wild at present,sleet also.!!!

paulry

Apparently there's very little difference between NuLab and Tory:

paulry

That's the assumption that I'm working with.

cliffyboy

That diagram nails it, Paulry. There is no way the Labour and the Conservative Parties are fundamentally opposed to each other, not in a million years, and on the issue of this obscene injustice, the Tories would be up there with the Labour Government toe to toe against us, almost as united as they are when it comes to their own salaries, allowances, and pensions.

Hypocrisy seeps through their slimy, sweaty pores.

Wol

Remember that the vector diagram has had its points put in by someone who has made a subjective judgement of the parties' values, so is little more that a pretty way of presenting prejudices! A communist, making up such a diagram, might put Lenin top right, and half the Republicans in the USA would place Obama bottom left.

paulry

The diagram even with it's questionable accuracy seems to indicate that the main parties have modified their official faces to deceive the electorate and undercut eachother. Once elected their real characters become evident but one thing which unites them is their tendency to feather their own nests at our expense. They're indeed very slimy.

I agree. Some months ago on an old immigration thread this diagram was wheeled out and thread contributers did the test to see where they stood politically. Interestingly those who were arguing miles apart from my own beliefs plotted on the graph very closely to my own position. So the graph probably has little value in the real world.