rhm said:
blowdart said:
*snip*

Don't get me wrong - Labour suck too. PFI is one of the most ridiculous ideas in history, essentially a government accounting scam whereby debt goes onto corporations ballance sheets (at a huge cost to the state in the long run) instead of the state's in order to make the government look better by not increasing the budget deficit. The fact that the state can borrow at much cheaper rates than corporations is what makes it insane.

 

But is a Conservative government going to be better or worse? I think the freedom Cameron talks about is fake (who wants to run their own hospital? It's insane). The freedom that he's actually going to implement is for News Corporation to take over British media after he's removed Ofcom. And the freedom for banks to carry on doing whatever the hell they like with even less regulation.

 

There are no real personal freedoms on the agenda with the conservatives. Do I see a committment to repeal the Digial Economy act? Only the Lib Dems have promised to remove the disconnection rule from that. Would a Conservative government have allowed 'civil unions' or will one upgrade them to marriages to avoid that euphamism? Given that Cameron has given full support to a Christian nutjob MP who thinks she can "cure homosexuality" I doubt it. Would a Conservative government legalise pot? Those are personal freedoms that right-wing parties will never agree to and yet they like to talk about freedom.

 

I can't see anything good coming from a Conservative government. Even the spending cuts will come at the expense of higher unemployment.

I'll be voting Conservative.

 

We need a Government which can sort out the massive debt which Labour has landed this country in (again). With Labour's vested interests (unions etc) and the fact they helped cause the country's indebtedness, I really don't think they are in the best place to solve our issues. Similarly, while Nick Clegg seems like a nice guy and the Lib Dems may be substantially better than Labour, I disagree with them on a whole raft of policies: joining the Euro, cutting short prison sentences, amnesty for illegal immigrants etc.

 

I feel genuinely quite excited by Cameron's "direct democracy" and transparency agenda: vote for your police chief, see all government spending over £25,000, referendum on council tax rises, "community right to buy" closing pubs, ability to set up own schools. And, for the the record, despite what rhm claims, this doesn't mean setting up your own hospitals.  I was fortunate to have a relatively good secondary education, but I want the same benefit for my children. It's clear that despite modest increases, rapid investment in secondary schools hasn't increased standards to the rate which we would all wish (lots of new computers but poor discipline etc). I fully support the idea of busting open the state education market, allowing businesses, charities and other groups to create new state-funded schools in the market driving up standards. 

 

Re Murdoch, I don't like the influence Murdoch has on our media either, but come on, The Sun supported Labour at the last elections. Murdoch just supports the people who are in, or about to get into power as it gives him leverage to call for deregulation. 

 

I don't frankly give a damn about Cameron's background or wealth. He comes over, to me at least, a lot more sincere than Brown or Nick Clegg (claims he's from Sheffield yet his parents own a mansion).  We need to get away from this divisive and futile "I-voted-Labour-because-my-dad-did" or "I-voted-Tory-because-I-am-rich" mantra, vote for policies, not something which the leaders have no control over (their class).