talkmagic.co.uk

This is a pretty handy page for comparing the major parties' views on various topics: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/ ... 515961.stm

Good ol' beeb...

To be honest, in my mind Labour are out of the picture now.

My opinions on Tories and Lib Dem are simply as follows:

Pretty simple really, i am a student and so therefore in the short run, Lib Dems will benefit me greatly. Clegg wants to reduce University fees, redesign school teaching structures and raise the minimum tax limit to 10,000. All of this is very appealing of course, but it will only benefit me in the short run - if he manages any of it at all, which i doubt.

I am definitely against Lib Dem's opinion to join the Euro, theres no way it can be a positive turn out with Brussels ruling the EU. They also want to scrap the Trident nuclear plan, and although i am against Nuclear weapons, and it would save 100 billion, there are other countries out there amassing Nuclear weapons as we speak and the more we falter with our own protection the more chance we have of ending up in a dog eat dog situation.

The conservatives however, despite beign probably the worst option for a student like me, are better in the long run - in my opinion. This is because of their immigration policies, and their ideas to rectify the recession and the many other major issues affecting Britain at the moment.

The problem with the Tories is that they will inevitably raise taxes, but to be honest none of the parties will be able to do otherwise, as we are in such a state that the country needs more input to its GDP (Gross Domestic Product).

All in all, the conservatives are in my opinion a better long term solution, as i think that a hung parliament will bring England to its knees.

Steve

A hung parliament would mean government without a whip.

I'm keen to see how that would work!

Pete

All this stuff on Trident seems to be confusing people. As I understand it, no-one is saying scrap Trident and disarm; the Lib Dems want to scrap the Trident replacement which will cost billions. There are good and bad things to say about that stance, but what they are not proposing is nuclear disarmament.

Yeah but if they were to scrap the replacement, then we would be sacrificing the ability to put ourselves ahead of most other countries, meaning that if a nuclear stand off became apparent, we would dominate most others. I;m not to sure what to think on it to be honest.

But pcwells, don't you think that they would spend more time trying to out will each other and pass bills, rather than focusing on their original policies that they wanted to implement? I think it would just be a constant tug of war over who can do what.

I think even the nice basic nuclear bombs are enough to kill everyone on the earth...

anything else is phallic posturing..we dont need more expensive bombs at all.

The other argument on nuclear weapons is that our Trident setup was developed during the cold war, and is designed as a deterrent against the type of enemy that no longer exists. We're not facing heavily-armed superpowers any more. If the scaremongering is true, the enemy is a bunch of tinpot dictatorships at best - and at worst, it's a collection of shapeless terrorist groups, who don't have a neat postcode to feed into a missile's GPS system.

As I understood it, the Lib Dems were saying that there are still a few years to go before the contract with Trident needs to be renewed, but rather than renew it now, as Labour and Conservatives want to do, we should take the available time to look for alternatives that are better equipped to deal with the enemies we face today. According to them, many senior military figures are saying that more appropriate alternatives are out there.

So, as has already been pointed out, they're not saying that we should disarm.

Pete