Liberal Democrats surge in polls and send alarm bells ringing for the Conservatives

[MrPinkPanther]

Read my above post. "There is no alternative" is a pretty good argument going off that data.

I personally believe safety should be prioritised over everything.

I really want to keep this as brief as possible but alas here we go, heres my steps to success in line with LD policy:

• Firstly you need to offer people "Green loans" to help make their homes as efficient as possible which they would then be able to pay back over extended periods of time by the savings that they make. This is a sensible idea, rather than promising "free money" to make green homes (Which lets me honest is never going to happen) they set a reachable policy by offering loans which of course they will get the money back on.
  
• Secondly you need to set a efficiency target for all new homes. Again this is reachable and I believe Labour are setting a similar goal.
  
• Thirdly invest in wave, wind and solar power and offer the public a chance to help own part of that. Schemes such as this have been extremely popular on a small scale in villages where every person pays a small amount towards a wind turbine and then makes part of the money off of it. You're giving people back control over their power.

What the Liberal Democrats want to do is use all of the disused shipyards to start building brand new wind farms. Currently they are built in Germany which is plain stupid when we have both the facilities and the workforce. To me this sounds like a good work scheme that will get people jobs and help move Britain towards a brighter, cleaner future!

[-:Undertaker:-]

You'd need a LOT of wind farms, it'd cost quite a lot and would have a low ROI... it takes loads of years to get the turbine to pay for itself.

If a nuke is dropped on the UK we're all dead. The UK is small, a couple of nukes and we'd be all dead. With a nuclear deterrent the country attacking would think twice before launching an attack. It also gives us more weight in negotiations (with Iran, etc.) because we'd have the power and ability to destroy them so they'd listen.

I would love to see a nuclear (bomb) free world but it won't happen.

Actually I shall add to that, wind farms dont actually pay themselves back and require subsidies. Infact our energy bills are so high because the government and the European Union force energy companies into subsidising these schemes (as well as using taxpayers money to subsidise them) in which the companies which make the wind turbines (many have links with EU and government officals) essentially are being paid by the taxpayer and the billpayer for something which is ineffective and requires an enormous amount of money and effort to power/keep running.

I'd like to point out how "Scrapping Trident" does not equal "Scrapping Nuclear weapons" contrary to popular belief. The Liberal Democrats advocate a cheaper alternative to Trident whereby the UK would have less Nuclear submarines, as I've said £100,000,000,000 is a hell of a lot of money, its needed elsewhere.

As for Nuclear power I'm sorry but "There is no alternative" is not an argument. Considering a typical Nuclear Reactor will produce 20-30 Tons of radioactive material a year that remains fatal until it decays with no known way to dispose of it, I think we need to rule out Nuclear power here and now. Did you know that during the year 2000 alone enough plutonium was created to build over 34,000 Nuclear weapons?

Tomorrows YouGov poll:
Lib Dem: 33; Con: 32; Lab: 26.

Trident does not cost £100 billion, projected costs by the government are at the £20 billion to £30 billion mark. The Liberal Democrats have not said 'lets have less nuclear submarines' to my knowledge, they have said 'lets abolish the independent nuclear deterrent of the United Kingdom' which whether you like it or not, is the core of our defence as a nation. There is a way to dispose of spent nuclear rods and material and its underground; India, China, Japan, the United States and many other countries double or more the size of our population deal with nuclear waste perfectly fine so why is it such a big deal for the United Kingdom?

These rods pose no risk to health as they are stored away from the population, infact natural background radiation in Cornwall poses more of a risk than rods which are nowhere near the population and are thousands of feet underground/in concrete bunkers. You and the Liberal Democrats have fallen for the total scaremongering of the green lobby which means that when our energy crisis hits (which it will unless we build nuclear power plants now) we will be stuck with expensive bills powering the wind turbines, as well as being held hostage by the likes of Russia and Saudi Arabia to meet our energy needs which cannot and will not be filled by renewables.

I personally believe safety should be prioritised over everything.

I really want to keep this as brief as possible but alas here we go, heres my steps to success in line with LD policy:

• Firstly you need to offer people "Green loans" to help make their homes as efficient as possible which they would then be able to pay back over extended periods of time by the savings that they make. This is a sensible idea, rather than promising "free money" to make green homes (Which lets me honest is never going to happen) they set a reachable policy by offering loans which of course they will get the money back on.
• Secondly you need to set a efficiency target for all new homes. Again this is reachable and I believe Labour are setting a similar goal.
• Thirdly invest in wave, wind and solar power and offer the public a chance to help own part of that. Schemes such as this have been extremely popular on a small scale in villages where every person pays a small amount towards a wind turbine and then makes part of the money off of it. You're giving people back control over their power.

What the Liberal Democrats want to do is use all of the disused shipyards to start building brand new wind farms. Currently they are built in Germany which is plain stupid when we have both the facilities and the workforce. To me this sounds like a good work scheme that will get people jobs and help move Britain towards a brighter, cleaner future!

The first point shows that when you say a 'green loan' you basically mean 'a grant which is funded by the already over-taxed taxpayer' which means you will cripple the economy building these useless wind turbines. If they prove so great and effective, why do you honestly not think we have no converted to them yet? - because they are ineffective and add an estimated 1/4 to the bills of the taxpayer.

On the second part which I have highlighted, i'm sorry but when will you (the left) understand this? - we are skint. We have no money as a nation and its abhorent that you ask people to pay more and more to fund the waste in this country. No doubt to fund something like this you would have to use force (as per usual) to make people pay for these schemes which do not work and create a drain on the economy. The same old story time and time again.

To add finally to UKIP voters swinging to Liberal Democrats, there would be no Britain left after 5 years of a Liberal 'Democrat' government because it would be all signed away to the European Union. We want proportional representation and as far as I understand it, you haven't fully committed yourselves to that anyway. The UKIP vote already splits the Conservative vote and cost the Conservatives 20 to 30 seats back in 2005 so we are having an effect (and bear in mind that was with a pathetic 2.2% of the vote, this year its expected to be at 5% to 8%).

[MattFr]

Actually I shall add to that, wind farms dont actually pay themselves back and require subsidies. Infact our energy bills are so high because the government and the European Union force energy companies into subsidising these schemes (as well as using taxpayers money to subsidise them) in which the companies which make the wind turbines (many have links with EU and government officals) essentially are being paid by the taxpayer and the billpayer for something which is ineffective and requires an enormous amount of money and effort to power/keep running.



Trident does not cost £100 billion, projected costs by the government are at the £20 billion to £30 billion mark. The Liberal Democrats have not said 'lets have less nuclear submarines' to my knowledge, they have said 'lets abolish the independent nuclear deterrent of the United Kingdom' which whether you like it or not, is the core of our defence as a nation. There is a way to dispose of spent nuclear rods and material and its underground; India, China, Japan, the United States and many other countries double or more the size of our population deal with nuclear waste perfectly fine so why is it such a big deal for the United Kingdom?

These rods pose no risk to health as they are stored away from the population, infact natural background radiation in Cornwall poses more of a risk than rods which are nowhere near the population and are thousands of feet underground/in concrete bunkers. You and the Liberal Democrats have fallen for the total scaremongering of the green lobby which means that when our energy crisis hits (which it will unless we build nuclear power plants now) we will be stuck with expensive bills powering the wind turbines, as well as being held hostage by the likes of Russia and Saudi Arabia to meet our energy needs which cannot and will not be filled by renewables.



The first point shows that when you say a 'green loan' you basically mean 'a grant which is funded by the already over-taxed taxpayer' which means you will cripple the economy building these useless wind turbines. If they prove so great and effective, why do you honestly not think we have no converted to them yet? - because they are ineffective and add an estimated 1/4 to the bills of the taxpayer.

On the second part which I have highlighted, i'm sorry but when will you (the left) understand this? - we are skint. We have no money as a nation and its abhorent that you ask people to pay more and more to fund the waste in this country. No doubt to fund something like this you would have to use force (as per usual) to make people pay for these schemes which do not work and create a drain on the economy. The same old story time and time again.

To add finally to UKIP voters swinging to Liberal Democrats, there would be no Britain left after 5 years of a Liberal 'Democrat' government because it would be all signed away to the European Union. We want proportional representation and as far as I understand it, you haven't fully committed yourselves to that anyway. The UKIP vote already splits the Conservative vote and cost the Conservatives 20 to 30 seats back in 2005 so we are having an effect (and bear in mind that was with a pathetic 2.2% of the vote, this year its expected to be at 5% to 8%).

FlyDuo won't reply to this, haha.

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not make posts that do not contribute positively to the thread and are therefore considered pointless.

[MrPinkPanther]

FlyDuo won't reply to this, haha.

Edited by Catzsy (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not make posts that do not contribute positively to the thread and are therefore considered pointless.

Summarise it in a short paragraph and I will be more than happy to reply. As I keep saying, I don't have time to read long replies or to come up with long answers.

[Inseriousity.]

I saw a recent Lib Dem local leaflet campaign. It was going quite well actually and then it said:

work on fairer pay
work on fairer education

and MOST IMPORTANTLY, protect the environment!

sorry but the list of priorities is wrong there! Maybe it's just the local Lib Dem and I'm sure FlyDuo can shed some light on Lib Dem's priorities. Is the environment a higher priority than fairer pay and education as that is what the leaflet implied.

[MrPinkPanther]

I saw a recent Lib Dem local leaflet campaign. It was going quite well actually and then it said:

work on fairer pay
work on fairer education

and MOST IMPORTANTLY, protect the environment!


sorry but the list of priorities is wrong there! Maybe it's just the local Lib Dem and I'm sure FlyDuo can shed some light on Lib Dem's priorities. Is the environment a higher priority than fairer pay and education as that is what the leaflet implied.

On a national level the priority list is as follows (In order of importance):
1. Fair taxes so essentially fairer pay.
2. Fairer education with smaller class sizes.
3. A greener and more sustainable economy.
4. A fairer politics meaning constitutional reform.

However obviously regionally it varies and on a candidate by candidate basis. I for one know my Local Liberal Democrat candidate is Eurosceptic but broadly agrees with all of the other Liberal Democrat policies.

I hope that helps.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Summarise it in a short paragraph and I will be more than happy to reply. As I keep saying, I don't have time to read long replies or to come up with long answers.

It doesn't require a terribly long answer, you can summarise it yourself in your reply which I eagerly await.

[MrPinkPanther]

It doesn't require a terribly long answer, you can summarise it yourself in your reply which I eagerly await.

As I have said, summarise it in a few questions or lines and I will be more than happy to.

[-:Undertaker:-]

As I have said, summarise it in a few questions or lines and I will be more than happy to.

- Wind Turbines are proven not to work efficently and are uneconomical.
- Nuclear is safe and viable, also the rods pose no threat to health as they are not located near the population.
- Energy bills are higher because of uneconomical 'green schemes' which hit the economy hard.
- Nuclear weapons are the core of our defence policy and cost £20 to 30 billion, not £100 billion as Nick Clegg claims.
- The euro is a disasterous currency and joining it would mean losing our economic and monetary sovereignty.
- Liberal Democrats want the AV system I understand, not the PR system.
- Taxing the richest leads to a brain drain which was proven in the 1970s.

[MrPinkPanther]

Thanks

- Wind Turbines are proven not to work efficently and are uneconomical.

I agree they are inefficient however they are "economical" in the sense that they generate more power than they cost. You need to remember that Wind power is just one small area that the Liberal Democrats want in their grand energy plan. For more information visit:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/energy_and...te_change.aspx

- Nuclear is safe and viable, also the rods pose no threat to health as they are not located near the population.

It's safe as long as they are not located near population, you are correct however where do we put it? I mean dumping it in the sea isn't going to work because it is going to harm its surroundings and you always run the risk of it being rediscovered far into the future. It's not only the waste itself that is the problem because if a Nuclear plant goes wrong, it goes very wrong and as I have said 34,000 Nuclear weapons could be created from the plutonium from one year of Nuclear power production alone.

- Energy bills are higher because of uneconomical 'green schemes' which hit the economy hard.

Energy bills will be higher at first, of course they will be. The green energy structure will prove costly but once it is up and running it is cheap to maintain and more importantly sustainable. It can help to make Britain completely independent so we no longer have to rely on the Middle east for energy.

- Nuclear weapons are the core of our defence policy and cost £20 to 30 billion, not £100 billion as Nick Clegg claims.

Incorrect. Thats what the government are saying however an independent study puts the cost of Trident as high as £130 Billion with the middle estimate being £100 Billion. It is because the governments estimates don't take into account the expansive forces required to support Trident nor the additional instillations that would be required. I mean the two aircraft carriers for Trident alone are likely to cost £5 Billion.

- The euro is a disasterous currency and joining it would mean losing our economic and monetary sovereignty.

A lot of Liberal Democrats are against the Euro and as I have said it isn't current policy. Many of the leading Liberal Democrats have recently said in Public that they don't think the Euro is a good idea.

- Liberal Democrats want the AV system I understand, not the PR system.

The Liberal Democrats propose STV, one of the most proportional electoral systems there is!

- Taxing the richest leads to a brain drain which was proven in the 1970s.

We've been through this. The Winter of discontent was caused by excessive trade union movement and strikes, nothing to do with a "brain drain". Essentially the Unions demanded pay rises above the governments set 5% target which was designed to curb inflation, the government refused and people walked out from work en masse. If you wish me to go into more detail on this point then just ask, I'm quite interested in the Winter of Discontent ^-^.