Stop the Cuts - National Demonstration

If our local MP's listen to what we say and yet go against it...cough simon hughes cough there is no point in voting.

There is a very good reason to vote Liberal Democrat if you are student, namely that if they ever got into power (which I think is unlikely) they would likely abolish tuition fees altogether.

People need to be realistic, running around burning effigies of Nick Clegg is probably great fun and gets everyone excited, but they made various promises about what they were going to if they won power, they didn't win power, but joined a coalition as the (very) junior partner so are unable to do as they please.

You might as well march around burning effigies of Caroline Lucas . . . look what the Green Party's policy on education states:

: ED234 Under a Green government there would be no student loans as there would be no tuition fees and living costs would be met by Citizen’s Income. In the short term we will reintroduce student grants to meet living costs :

. . . they didn't deliver that either! The fucking lying bastards, what's the point in ever voting for the Green Party again ? And don't use the excuse that they didn't win the election either, that's the dirty little trick the Lib Dems are trying to pull, not winning an election is no excuse for not implementing your policies.

Raising fees will have no short term effects. It will take 20 years for the money to be paid back to government.

The effects will be felt immediately, in fact even before they are implemented, the effects being sought will be felt on the day the policy is announced.

I don't know the details, but I imagine they'll be able to bundle the debt up and sell it so that they don't have to wait 20 years for the cashflow.

I don't know the details, but I imagine they'll be able to bundle the debt up and sell it so that they don't have to wait 20 years for the cashflow.

Yep, the debt is an asset, like when companies use factoring.

Be hard to get a good price for loans when they keep saying how a lot of people won't pay it all back or may not pay at all due to thier low income, plus they are looking at ways to stop/discourage people from paying it back early.

Although with the finance sectors recent form of mixing up and buying and selling debt you never know!

Be hard to get a good price for loans when they keep saying how a lot of people won't pay it all back or may not pay at all due to thier low income . . .

Don't worry, they work it out properly.

Yeah i guess they have gone through the experience of having to sell off cheaply early on as the deals were too good (hence the income you start paying it back at being reduced) and they have closed the option of going bankrupt and having it cancelled. I think there are even tools in place whereby they can chase people up for the debt in some other countries.

Still they would have to offer a pretty sweet deal for anyone wanting to invest and not see any pay back for at least 3 years.

Yeah i guess they have gone through the experience of having to sell off cheaply early on as the deals were too good . . . .

No need to sell assets, certainly no need to sell them cheap.

There is a very good reason to vote Liberal Democrat if you are student, namely that if they ever got into power (which I think is unlikely) they would likely abolish tuition fees altogether.

People need to be realistic, running around burning effigies of Nick Clegg is probably great fun and gets everyone excited, but they made various promises about what they were going to if they won power, they didn't win power, but joined a coalition as the (very) junior partner so are unable to do as they please.

You might as well march around burning effigies of Caroline Lucas . . . look what the Green Party's policy on education states:

: ED234 Under a Green government there would be no student loans as there would be no tuition fees and living costs would be met by Citizen’s Income. In the short term we will reintroduce student grants to meet living costs :

. . . they didn't deliver that either! The fucking lying bastards, what's the point in ever voting for the Green Party again ? And don't use the excuse that they didn't win the election either, that's the dirty little trick the Lib Dems are trying to pull, not winning an election is no excuse for not implementing your policies.

If you want to have a debate about things that can't be compared, now I'm ready ;)

This is the pledge Clegg made:

“I pledge to vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament and to pressure the government to introduce a fairer alternative”

The issue has nothing to do with them not having a majority in parliament. He promised to vote one way, and has now voted the other way.

Caroline Lucas also signed the pledge, and kept her promise by voting against the tuition fee increase.

It's already come out that the LibDems had decided that if they went in to a coalition with the Tories they would drop their opposition to tuition fees. This was during the election campaign when they were still promising that if they got in they would abolish them. Since they, like the rest of us, knew they were not going to get in then you could say their only real policy on tuition fees was to accept them (and to go along with the increases which both Labour and Conservatives were obviously planning). This was the LibDem leadership - not the rank and file, not even the standing MPs. So singling out Clegg for criticism seems spot on really.
More broadly, how will the LibDems campaign in the next election? Will all of their policies be put forward with the proviso that they will ditch them if they enter a coalition government? The same question might be asked of the other two parties too. Which policies are not up for negotiation and compromise? In other words, which are promises and which are preferences?

The issue has nothing to do with them not having a majority in parliament.

It has in the respect that with a majority they would abolition tuition fees altogether.

He promised to vote one way, and has now voted the other way.

Ok, a straight up question, answer it as honestly as you can.

Why do you think Nick Clegg made the promise and then reneged on it ?

Caroline Lucas also signed the pledge, and kept her promise by voting against the tuition fee increase.

That might be because she is not in a coalition with the conservatives, given that position she might find herself in an equally difficult position.

It's already come out that the LibDems had decided that if they went in to a coalition with the Tories they would drop their opposition to tuition fees. This was during the election campaign when they were still promising that if they got in they would abolish them.

This sounds about right, put forward what you believe in to the electorate + formulate policy in case of a hung parliament with differing compromises depending on the composition of any future government. All parties do this for every election.

More broadly, how will the LibDems campaign in the next election? Will all of their policies be put forward with the proviso that they will ditch them if they enter a coalition government?

As far as I know they are going to campaign as previously with their own agenda - and, of course, if they end up in a coalition, like any party, they will need to make compromises.

Politics is about give and take. Clegg gave, and Cameron took. Clegg's in an impossible situation, and will only eventually discredit entirely the LibDems.

It's already come out that the LibDems had decided that if they went in to a coalition with the Tories they would drop their opposition to tuition fees.

I'd word it like this (after removing the ever so slightly loaded "it's already come out"):

The LibDems had decided that if they went in to a coalition with the Tories they would be forced to drop their opposition to tuition fees.

Clegg's in an impossible situation, and will only eventually discredit entirely the LibDems.

He looks fucked right now, but this will probably be mostly forgotten by the next election by most people.

Ok, a straight up question, answer it as honestly as you can.

Why do you think Nick Clegg made the promise and then reneged on it ?

That's an easy one, he's a politician. Making promises they can't keep and reneging on them later is their stock in trade.

That's an easy one, he's a politician. Making promises they can't keep and reneging on them later is their stock in trade.

The question is still sitting there, all lonely at not having been answered, why do you think he did this ?

^^^I doubt that very much.

It's obvious why he did it. Politics is smoke and mirrors, and pulling the wool. It's got no place nowadays in our lives, other than logistical, rather than ideological. Power abhors a vacuum, and politics is a great big vacuum, with diminishing powers. Politics is nothing but foreplay.

The question is still sitting there, all lonely at not having been answered, why do you think he did this ?

Because he wants power and the only way he could get a sniff was by reneging.

This sounds about right, put forward what you believe in to the electorate + formulate policy in case of a hung parliament with differing compromises depending on the composition of any future government. All parties do this for every election.

As far as I know they are going to campaign as previously with their own agenda - and, of course, if they end up in a coalition, like any party, they will need to make compromises.

The LibDems had decided that if they went in to a coalition with the Tories they would be forced to drop their opposition to tuition fees.

No. Not the LibDems; a few of the LibDem leaders, secretly, without consulting the MPs who they knew were now campaigning on promises their leader had no intention of keeping. They could have decided this was one policy they were not prepared to compromise on; whether or not they were right to is another matter. That it was Clegg's decision is beyond doubt. So why would you not single out Clegg for your anger? And after him the MPs who decided to vote for the bill. None of them ever gave any indication at all that this was a policy they would compromise on (though compromise is stretching it when your policy is to abandon a fee and you end up voting to increase that fee).
Also, when you say "People need to be realistic" isn't that one of those debating tactics you normally deplore? Realistic in this case being whatever* you* decide it is?

It's obvious why he did it.

Go on . . . . why did he do it ?

Politics is smoke and mirrors, and pulling the wool. It's got no place nowadays in our lives, other than logistical, rather than ideological. Power abhors a vacuum, and politics is a great big vacuum, with diminishing powers. Politics is nothing but foreplay.

Oh I see, he did it because of that, ok that's cleared it up.

tl;dr

any one come up with a single reason why people who desire to become middle-class or more middle-class shouldn't have to invest in themselves via university? Just like I who greatly improved my life by starting a business (well 3 now actually) have had to invest in myself and take on debt to start all of them?

yeah thats what I thought.

OK. As previously stated, admittedly flowery, politics isn't any longer able to make anything like the radical changes as are continually promised. The more useful and 'radical' these promises are, such as scrapping tuition fees, then the less likely they'll happen. Hence foreplay - no follow through. He did it because he was incapable, and knowingly so, of carrying out his promise. Simple as that. It's not complicated at all.

Because he wants power and the only way he could get a sniff was by reneging.

That's at least looks like an answer, but I'm still left with so many questions (I am not being sarcastic, I am literally stupid with regard to how other people think).

When you say he did this to gain power (make promises - win votes - forget promises - take power) - what do you think would drive someone to do such a thing - and for what - to become reviled by your electorate, by your party, to risk becoming (possibly) unelectable (?) to (possibly) damage your party ?

And what power did he gain, the power to compromise on core values ?