A Labour Government.

That's very funny, Smileless. You complain about us not taking notice of facts and figures, and then say you are not going to give us any anyway.
Who does that remind me of?
You're not really May, are you?

Thank you Maggie. No, I haven't been discouraged from voting Labour because of "the attitude of a few Gransnet keyboard warriors"; I'd already made my decision.

I don't agree with SAAK's sweeping comment regarding council workers and had I been on line at the time yesterday and wished to disagree, I would have done so without resorting to personally offensive remarks. I don't think that comment was as "rude and nasty as any one here" but of course that's my opinion.

I too enjoy intelligent debate and also enjoy some of the posts even though I don't personally agree with them. It's good to listen and appreciate another's point of view even if you're like minded. After all, isn't that what being a member of a civilised society is all about?

Good one dj

Really dj you could save yourself a lot ofif you stopped attributing remarks to the wrong poster. I have never complained about anyone not taking notice of facts and figures. Yesterday when accused of not producing facts and statistics I responded with an example from one of my posts where I did present a fact, then went on to say that I don't focus on statistics because they can be subjective.

Well if I were May, to you honestly think I'd say?

Not so good I'm afraid whitewave because I've never said that.

Sorry?

Smileless2012: Firstly, what a sad name! Why are you Smileless? I don't claim any 'right'. As you say, I am simply expressing my opinion that supporting a Conservative Government that is putting more and more families into poverty, making it more and more difficult for the majority of the country's children to receive the education they need for the future of the country as well as for themselves, and not helping young people find decent homes, is selfish. I can think of no other reason to vote Conservative. Can you give me some good reasons?

Celia I haven't read all the posts as I'm away with occasional internet. I agree with your points about the Conservatives. Just a word about Smileless - the name links to some significant distress in her life. Smileless is positive in many of her comments, we don't agree politically but I hope she doesn't mind my comments about her name x

I'm Smileless because almost 5 years ago we were cut out of our youngest son's and his children's lives. Don't think that I don't smile at all though, I do of course I just smile less than I used too. It was the original 'Cut out of their lives' thread that brought me to GN.

I will give you a reason. The Labour manifesto looks good on paper,very good infact but IMO is unsustainable. It's 'spend, spend, spend'.

I believe that the massive debt this manifesto will result in will place far more families in poverty, will do more damage to our education system and make it even more difficult for the young to find decent homes.

Not at all Iam, I've just explained my name choice.

Off to the hair dressers now but I'll be back on later.

I'm sorry you have had problems with your family. My husband and I have had similar problems, finally resolved after 20 years.

I agree that labour's promises look good on paper but I believe that the costings are genuine and the money that needs to be raised will be raised. Of course it will take some time to change everything, but this is not a poor country. There should not be families living in poverty and squalor in the UK. Spening creates wealth. If we build a million houses and train more nurses and employ more teachers, the workers involved have more money to spend. That money goes into the economy, and not into the offshore accounts of the rich. We should follow the example of Germany - you would not call Germany a socialist country I'm sure, but they are already doing almost all the things that Labour is calling for, and they have a very successful economy.

"Some of you simply do want to listen to another point of view regardless of whether or not facts and figures are used to support that view point."

This is what you said, Smileless, on the previous page.

Actually, I think you meant to say do NOT want, didn't you, as it doesn't make sense, otherwise.

Yes, I meant to say 'do not want' dj ' . Glad to see that you're paying closer attention to my posts, does that mean that you wont be attributing other posters' remarks to me in the future?

I'm sorry to hear that Celia but pleased that you've managed to resolve your problems. Gosh 20 years that's a long time; our almost 5 feels like a life time.

Smileless, it was YOUR post. Read it!
You've just admitted you said it!

Which other posters remarks did I attribute to you?
Do you have a problem with your memory?

Ooops, looks like you missed one dj as I wrote 'to you honestly' this morning instead of 'do you honestly'. Oh dear, clearly you're still not paying enough attention to my posts, still at least you appear to be trying.

Pathetic, Smileless.

durhamjen it's very bad manners to draw attention to any mistake in a poster's comments.Have noticed you do it a lot........but only with posters you don't like or views you disagree with.

Sorry, roses, but Smileless saying 'do want' when she meant 'do NOT want' is rather important, is it NOT?
Even she admits it.

It is bad manners, a bit like turning the crockery over to see the lettering.

I agree. It's unnecessary, and comes across as spiteful. It was perfectly clear what she meant. Let us follow Jeremy Corbyn's example and at least be pleasant to those we disagree with.

Oh dear dj is this the best you have to offer?. You posted this morning "You complain about us not taking notice of facts and figures, and then you say you are not going to give us any".

I haven't put that in any of the posts that are on this thread; not one, and just to be absolutely certain that I am not having trouble with my memory, I've just looked at every post I've made. You have now told me that I've admitted that I said it. What I said was I was accused of not producing facts and statistics to support my point of view, so I pointed out that I'd used facts with reference to quantitative easing and did not use statistics because they can be subjective.

No, I'm not pathetic dj. I'm not the one trying to undermine another's point of view by attributing remarks to them that they haven't made and I'm not so desperate in my desire to try and belittle someone that I resort to pointing out an error in one of their posts.

roses.

Jen, who are you to correct people's posts, you really are pumping your hysteria button, do calm down ,

With regard to Labour getting the country into debt, can I point out that in May 2010 under Labour the national debt was 979.8 billion pounds which was 65% of GDP. In May 2017 after 7 years of conservatives promising to get rid of the debt via austerity. it is 1.73 trillion pounds which is 89.3% of GDP. Their methods have clearly not worked. it's time to go down a different path.

"Some of you simply do want to listen to another point of view regardless of whether or not facts and figures are used to support that view point."

Smileless, can you explain what this means, because I am at a loss to understand it, if you did not mean to criticise us for not listening to facts and figures.