Should I vote Conservative

Good post Cunco I agree with you.

Anyone remember the song and dance made by the BBC and Tory party, when Labour had not properly costed its manifesto? There was a huge fuss made by every political programme and every Tory.

What have we heard from the BBC? A polite query from various presenters and Ken Clarke saying you should never cost a manifesto, and Humphreys apparently accepting the statement without question.

If you are looking for bias, look no further.

The Tories are requesting the voter to accept all their woolly promises on blind faith.

My worry is with all of the JC promises where is that money REALLY going to come from?

Something just doesn't seem to add up?

I listened to that interview this morning on Radio 4 ww and it didn't come across like that to me at all.

Mine too, Gillybob. Campaign promises are not binding, anyway, they are expressions of what the party hope to do, or hope we will believe that they will do.

If they don't get in, no-one can blame them for none of it getting done. If they do get in, they can put off implementation indefinitely, blaming the previous lot for making it impossible for them to achieve their aims.

My worry is with all of the JC promises where is that money REALLY going to come from?

I thik it's going to come from the same place that all those billions for quantitative easing came from (far more billions than the LP plans might involve). I don't see anyone complaining about that.

The difference being that QE kept the banks afloat and protected everyone with bank accounts but we've seen nothing of it beyond that. It didn't stimulate investment or create new jobs or 'trickle down' to the general economy. (OTH, it didn't create huge debt, either. The tories did that post 2010*) The LP plans are intended to create jobs, create work for businesses of all sizes and give a return to the Treasury by way of taxes on this economic activity.

I recall studying the 1930s Depression at uni and one of the secondary effects of the house building programme was to create a demand for consumer goods which helped to stimulate the economy.

Of course, it's difficult to pick economic holes in the Tory manifesto because so little of it is costed.

*Anecdotal so disregard if you wish. The medium sized transport company my DP was working for in 2010 had as its main business the transport of sand, gravel and related building materials. The work just dried up once the tory austerity programme got under way. Which, of course, led to 'rationalisation' of the workforce...out of decently paid jobs and on to benefits with reduced spending power (or massively increased debt)

We have to make the connection between our consumer driven economy,employment, decent wages, and growth, as well as focussing on exports. They are both important.

I agree whitewave. I saw McDonnell being interviewed a while ago and he was constantly badgered about costing and couldn't finish answering any of the questions because of these interruptions.

When Hammond was interviewed, one polite question re costing was asked, which he declined to answer and then the matter was dropped.

A brief history of manifesto promises

I'd like to know how the costing of the change from free school lunches for three primary years to free breakfasts for seven primary years was done, supposedly to free up money to be spent elsewhere in schools. The infrastructure and staffing for the extra lunches is now all in place, having been extremely difficult to achieve for many schools. So now, three years on, are they expected to make yet more changes to kitchen and supervisory staff hours, switching them from lunchtime to early morning? Presumably get the morning cleaners in even earlier and pay someone to set up the halls for eating, then clear and clean them again before morning assembly? Assuming that is that we're talking half decent breakfasts and not a bowl of cereal at the desks, which is what any school provides for children who need it anyway. I can't see a massive saving here, just a massive disruption for most primary schools.

Proof that Tories lie to us.

“The Coalition government enacted a programme of austerity but claimed that key services such as the NHS and schools would be ‘ring-fenced’ — true in the strict sense that their budgets were not cut, but in practice they faced a prolonged freeze that meant they couldn’t do everything asked of them.”

This was said by Osborne in an editorial. Can't wait for more confessions.

Maybot opposed workers rights that she now says she wants to protect - to get the workers to vote for her.

politicalscrapbook.us1.list-manage.com/track/click?u=a424ae15fced56b3bcdaed9be&id=fe50a1170a&e=66bdcbee4a

politicalscrapbook.net/2017/05/may-warns-wages-would-fall-under-labour-on-the-day-wages-fell-under-the-tories/

Never heard of a 'Maybot'.

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maybot

Luckily the press did not miss this.

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html

Maybot to get control of the news if you vote for her.

This is an incredibly dangerous proposal and a very slippery slope. First they cite security as the reason for control and censorship, which people may feel OK with, but once we set off down that route before you know it, total control. Think China.

Yes, it is ostensibly to protect from threats of terrorism/ criminal rings/bullying and such as online grooming of children or for children to be able to access violence online and it's true that the internet is a double-edged sword.

But I'd rather have an open and free internet environment than a censored one. Centralised control defeats what the creators of internet intended - instant access to information from anywhere in the world for the millions of people who would never use it for evil or malicious purposes.

We used to pride ourselves on freedom of speech and a truly independent media. This is the beginnings of a dictatorship and we mustn't allow it to happen. Don't give the Maybot team carte blanche to restrict our access to the www.

"Where's Theresa?

Theresa May is hiding from the public in this election campaign hand picking audiences, vetting questions, and keeping secret the locations she'll be visiting. There's one very simple reason for it - she knows that there is enormous opposition and anger towards her and her party after their policies have wrecked the lives of so many people. Thousands would jump at the chance to voice that anger in protests and demonstrations if they had the opportunity, as we saw from the hastily organised demonstration yesterday.

We're putting out a call for any information: we working had to find out where Theresa May will be along the campaign trail but if you have any information please let us know! We'll help to pull together protests, demonstrations, and actions to make sure her policies are exposed as they should be - wherever she may be, however short notice it is."

She using the swell of the Brexit vote and those garnered from UKIP, to launch the 3 initiatives relating to pensioners. She's risking getting away with it by banking on Brexiteers giving her the mandate for a hard Brexit AND cuts in the fuel allowance; triple lock pensions and counting house values as assets to pay for the elderly sick and those needing social care.

If you stay well, live a long life and die suddenly you can beat her plan, otherwise, beat her at the ballot box June 8th.

Remember Cameron promising that "The NHS will be safe in our hands" - and look what has happened on his watch. Even I believed him at the time because he had so needed the NHS when his child was alive. But many of the good intentions that he spouted before he was PM evaporated in a puff of Blue smoke.
"The greenest government ever" was another of his slogans. And all we had was cuts in funding to renewables, the backing of fracking and the ridiculously over complicated Green Deal scheme (supposedly a way of funding energy efficiency programmes) which sank beneath the bright blue waves.
We should view May's spouting about "just managing families" with huge scepticism.

TM voted REMAIN originally. She specializes in saying what she thinks you want to hear and has little real substance behind her. She probably will win a majority but the country needs an effective opposition to keep the Tories in check. Sadly it would seem that there are no effective leaders in any political party only a group of opportunists riding a tide of prejudice and xenophobia. Only the Lib Dems. and Greens appear to be genuine but they do not inspire many of us.

May has a reputation for prevarication and dithering, - couple that it's poor social skills at communication, I am unclear how that package makes her capable and in her robotic mantra of strong and stable.

May has a reputation for prevarication and dithering, - couple that it's poor social skills at communication [?], ...

Corbyn, on the other hand, ...

I see that the Tories have given up on immigration.

Corbyn whether you agree with them or not has principles that have guided his political life for the whole of his life. He never dithers and always votes according to these principles, which is why he has occasionally got himself into trouble by his party.

I am worried that JC's promises of everything for everyone will have to be funded by massive borrowing. This debt will have to be serviced by our children and grandchildren and will only get bigger and bigger over the years.

Corbyn always seems to me as he lives back in the dark ages. He thinks all business owners are the enemy, the mill owner employing people to work 100 hours a week for bread and water. Can he not see that it is the very businesses that he hates that keeps the country going. Not his public sector or unite Union.