Saturday, March 16 2013, 11:29AM
“It's not unpopular and it's not a tax. The liberal press, middle class liberals and those who expect to go through life riding on the back of the tax payer don't like it and are making a lot of noise about it but the vast majority of the electorate not only support these plans but also voted for the government who are introducing these plans. You do have to worry about a liberal left wing press who are assuming it is their role to battle against democracy and the will of the people.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 12:21PM
“The left are good at spinning democracy when it suits them. They would much prefer a soviet style system whereby you could only vote for the Labour part, or not vote. We are a democracy, it is the will of the people, however much that upsets the liberal left and their press. One person, one vote.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 12:50PM
“You are obsessed with the left, and yet seem to have only a very cartoonish grasp of what is actually an extremely broad spectrum of views.
Very few people on the left would want anything like a soviet system and support democracy, and many have done so with their lives, as have people on the right.
You know that calling anyone that challenges you a commie is on the same level as people accusing those who question multiculturalism of being nazis, don't you?
Any nearer to justifying your comment that people with the flu should call an ambulance Josef?
No?
Quel surprise.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 1:49PM
“You have no idea how parliamentary democracy works do you.
Simply because a government wins an election (which this one didn't) doesn't mean that it can do whatsoever it pleases without challenge.
The mandate is to form a government and that is all- you seem to think that winning an election means you have a mandate to effectively run a dictatorship for four or so years.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 2:45PM
“You present policies in the house of commons and all those who were democratically elected to serve the people by the people vote. If the democratic vote is in favour it becomes an act of parliament. It seems you would prefer a politically motivated witch hunt by the liberal press and various interested parties.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 3:00PM
“It is still one person one vote, whatever the left or right wing press have to say (and they both seem to have plenty to say)
Are you really saying that the press should be banned from covering political stories, or taking a position on political issues ?
Isn't that a bit , re , Soviet style repression of the media.
Cos I'd be really interested to hear your idea for how that would work.
You might like to google " China" or "North Korea" so you can have an idea of how that works in practice .
Come on - I'm all ears......
You don't really know where you are going with this do you? This might be your shortest-lived name EVER!”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 6:43PM
“Less of the insults if you dont mind Anthony - play the ball.
It's a small point not relevant to the main thrust of this discussion - but technically, no one voted for their MP on the basis that the party they represent would form a coalition.
Anyway - where do you stand on Porky's main view - that the media should not comment on political issues - at least I think thats what he is saying.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 7:27PM
“No, you are not thinking again omni, your brainwashing does go deep. My point all along is that when you have to fabricate the truth and the facts, this measure is not unpopular among the electorate as a whole (although the Herald, the left and some self interest groups don't like it) and this measure is not a tax, then you need to be held to account. The press clearly love to regulate themselves, they need to do it in an adult manner.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 8:13PM
“It's a big news story - this is a newspaper website.
The HE didn't call it the bedroom tax but it is what it known as so that's how it reports it.
.......and I'm not sure where the HE ever claimed it was unpopular with the population as a whole - I'd be well impressed if you could evidence that!”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 9:30PM
“My husband and I went for a meal last week. When we arrived at the restaurant it was almost empty and the waiter asked where we would like to sit. We opted for the area with larger tables which normally caters for bigger parties. As the place was quiet the waiter didn't mind us taking up more space than we needed.
Before our order arrived, there was a sudden influx of diners. At one point, the restaurant was unable to accommodate a party of 4 customers as the only available table seated only two. The waiter politely asked if we would move to the smaller table so the party of 4 could take our place. This of course was no problem and we made ours available.
There is no real difference between this and giving up your home for needier, larger families.”
Saturday, March 16 2013, 10:06PM
“HarryX - the big difference is of course who was going to pay for your meal. If you were paying for your meal you would have every right to feel agrieved, however if you were expecting the tax payer ( i.e. the influx of diners) to pay for your meal then I think the influx of diners should have some say in where you sat.”
Sunday, March 17 2013, 11:47PM
“I told you it was a forum piece more than 24 hours ago Porkie.
The evil stalinist Herlad Express tried to disguise it as editorial or content, but forgot not to add:
THE MASSIVE GREEN FORUM ICON
next to it that tells you that:
IT IS A FORUM PIECE
which was silly cos,
IT'S MASSIVE
AND GREEN
Luckily for us there are free spirits like yourself who can show us the way to the light.
We, the sheeple are eternally grateful oh wise master.
By the way - (oh and I was just joking - I think you are a massive *******) - most people agree that if people don't need big houses - we shouldn't pay them to live in them - including all of my "commie" buddies - "from each to each" - look it up - but most people who aren't mental just want to make sure it's fairly done.”
“Specialist Housing Committees have been consulted over the legal implications of re-classifying thousands of properties to maximise savings in the unpopular, soon to be implemented, bedroom tax.
Given the go-ahead, it's estimated 1 in 3 occupants in social housing – thought safe from the sanctions – upon re-evaluation will be deemed to have extra living space and forced either to find smaller properties or survive on lesser housing benefit.
Under new rules, a single bedroom having more than 180 sq ft floor space will be redefined as two rooms. The Government are calling to amend the 1985 Housing Act which will make these changes enforceable. The cost of dividing up living space should these measures be introduced will fall on the claimant, with the tenant facing eviction or heavy fines if failing to carry out work within strict time limits.”