Quote: chipolata @ July 20 2010, 10:07 AM BSTthe party stopped talking about it.
No they didn't.
The Big Society Page 2
Quote: Aaron @ July 20 2010, 10:08 AM BSTNo they didn't.
Christ, you're like a Stalinist, rewriting history!
And what are you doing for the Big Society, Aaron? You've got time on your hands, how are you going to make Britain better?
Quote: chipolata @ July 20 2010, 10:10 AM BSTChrist, you're like a Stalinist, rewriting history!
And you're like a socialist, with an earnest belief in something that never happened.
Quote: Aaron @ July 20 2010, 10:12 AM BSTAnd you're like a socialist, with an earnest belief in something that never happened.
They hardly talked about it after the initial launch. Still, we should be grateful that at least it got a mention in the manifesto. There's a lot of stuff they've done that never got mentioned in the manifesto at all.
Well I'm not sure what news coverage and editorial you were consuming then, because I saw it as a constant theme right through the election - the debates did overshadow everything else somewhat though, so perhaps it got crowded out if you were being more selective and limited in what you read/watched/listened to.
Whatever. You still haven't said what you as a true blue tory are doing for Dave's Big Society? It'd help your CV too.
Quote: sootyj @ July 20 2010, 9:24 AM BSTIf you think there are enough volunteers in your local community to run the pools, parks, daycentres, schools etc. Good luck. Having the money to live in a shit society isn't much of a bonus.
I'd say if YOU want to swim in the pool then pitch in and help run it. If you don't want to swim, then don't bother and there'll be no pool. Which is logical. If there are enough interested people then there'll be a pool. If there aren't, then a pool obviously isn't needed.
If I have more money from my job (less tax) then maybe I wouldn't have to do two bloody jobs and I would have the time to help run my kids school? This might well be more satisfying than letting some so called professionals teach my kids in a way that I don't agree with.
yes they still spoke about it, but like any sensible party they focussed on more popular stuff
Quote: Chappers @ July 20 2010, 2:16 AM BSTIf MP stands for Massive Pratt.
Nope! in my book it stands for Minging Privates.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ July 20 2010, 10:38 AM BSTI'd say if YOU want to swim in the pool then pitch in and help run it.
So where does it end? I want to prevent terrorism so I hang out at my local mosque with an instamatic? I want good roads I get up and tarmacadam them myself? Fair taxes should equal fair services.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ July 20 2010, 10:38 AM BSTThis might well be more satisfying than letting some so called professionals teach my kids in a way that I don't agree with.
If I had schools I might want a skilled neutral professional not a bunch of ignorant nimbys. But why stop there why don't you do the missus's open hearted surgery? In the big society there's no need for namby pamby knowledge and shite.
Quote: Frankie Rage @ July 20 2010, 10:38 AM BSTIf I have more money from my job (less tax) then maybe I wouldn't have to do two bloody jobs
Yeh right the money would wind up back in your pocket? Bollocks.
Hello tole roads, private policing, private pools, endless school top ups. Not to forget private health care.
And a big hello to 3 jobs.
I look forward to government shrinking and people realising just how much it did for them.
Quote: sootyj @ July 20 2010, 3:30 PM BSTI look forward to government shrinking and people realising just how much it did for them.
So what is the solution?
If you aren't going to cut, you must increase the income. How?
Quote: bigfella @ July 20 2010, 3:33 PM BSTSo what is the solution? If you aren't going to cut, you must increase the income. How?
So you admit Big Society is merely a way to save money, nothing more and nothing less? Which it won't do, because at some point the taxpayer will have to step in and clean up the mess.
Quote: chipolata @ July 20 2010, 3:58 PM BSTSo you admit Big Society is merely a way to save money, nothing more and nothing less? Which it won't do, because at some point the taxpayer will have to step in and clean up the mess.
I was responding to point about shrinking government.
I don't really understand why a shrinking government is touted as a good thing. Surely having one just the right size for optimal benefit is best?
Quote: bigfella @ July 20 2010, 3:33 PM BSTSo what is the solution?
If you aren't going to cut, you must increase the income. How?
Cut but cut with force and a tin ear to criticism.
Sootyj's number 1 areas for cutting.
1 All PFI funded plans for schools and hospitals, if urgent fund from current budget.
2 f-35, it wouldn't cost so much to make Typhoons carrier capable. Ditto Trident submarines regular ones with nuclear cruise missiles will do.
3 Means test all benefits; including winter fuel allowance and DLA.
4 Cut DLA to all recpients not spending it on aditional support.
5 Out of office health services and any other government services to the unemployed.
6 Replace fees for translators with tax credits and credits towards citizenship if possible.
Quote: Nogget @ July 20 2010, 4:13 PM BSTI don't really understand why a shrinking government is touted as a good thing. Surely having one just the right size for optimal benefit is best?
Well yes but what size is that?
Right size is best but it's balancing act. Personally I'd lean towards the larger government to give some room to play.