Calamity Clegg

[ToManyPhones]

0:50 - Oh, well he was right

[rosasmellshaha]

politics are pathetic

[CookieCrumblz]

Clegg is a volte face liar, he does back a social insurance and voucher system etc.

[mellowNdark]

@CookieCrumblz Yeah well vent your anger at Cameron... don't let the Tories win!!!

[CookieCrumblz]

@mellowNdark Clegg is the reason for this Toru government!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I'm afraid I have outdebated you, and exposed your lack of economic knowledge. You have evidently realised this, and you respond with insults. Good luck with your future videos. Feel free to debate with me again, I am completely open for political and economic dicussion.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Listen, you cannot debate you are not an intelligent man. You have the debating qualities of Geoffrey Howe against Denis Healy. You lack economic competence you could not even answer a simple question. You are a disgrace.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz If I am so unintelligent, why did you block me and refuse to debate with me? You are out of your depth, young man. Repeating the rhetoric of Ed Balls and then screaming 'economically illiterate! economically illiterate!' over and over again does not make you credible or intelligent. I do not support the Tories, yet you think that my fiscal conservatism must mean I am a Tory. Grow up, sonny Jim.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Firstly, I am on the right of the Labour Party, though I like Callaghan I do not entirely share his politics. I am not just repeating the economics of Ed Balls but the economics of Joseph Stigiltz, Richard Lambert, Dambiosa Moyo, John Maynard Keynes. Even Michael Portillo, Ken Clarke and the IMF back aspects of Labour's economic policy. You are effectively an economically illiterate Tory who is following the footsteps of Thatcher.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Callaghan was not on the left of the Labour party... he was on the right. Perhaps you do support a keynesian strategy, that's fine. I will stop calling you a Balls clone if you stop calling me an Osborne clone. I am independant from these politicians; I do not support any major political party. Shouting at me is doing nothing for your credibility. You're a tribal socialist, I can understand that. I used to be one, too. Stop arguing, let's start a sensible debate.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Jim was Old Labour, I am in many ways New Labour - though I am critical of the Iraq War, civil liberties crack-down, big state and being too centre-right in some respects. I am not a tribalist, I am a pluralist I want Labour to be an open, progressive movement dominating the centre ground. I support the Keynesian strategy because it works. Look at the economy now. We are flat-lining, NOT growing which undermines our economy. Listen to Richard Lambert!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz He was socially right wing. He privately opposed Roy Jenkins social reforms. And he often privately contemplated selling council houses, as the Tories did after him.

Labour will never dominate the center ground. They support massive government, ID cards, authoritarian-styled socialism. They don't care for personal freedom as the Liberals do. As a result of 13 Labour years, we have a bigger state than communist China.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Also, I think it is arrogant of Labour to think they are going to regain the Liberal vote just because they now U-turned on Iraq. Has it occured to them that we might detest their massive state policies? That we hate their anti-freedom ID card policies? The CCTV state? High taxation? I trust the Tories with the economy more than Labour. The Tories are despisable, but they are a necessary evil on the economy.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are a very confused man. Labour has recognized where it went wrong in government that is not a U-Turn - you obviously don't know what a U-Turn is. Labour has U-Turned on ID cards but CCTV has been proved to reduced crime. Labour is actually calling for lower taxes for the poorest whilst the Tories have increased taxes on lower incomes. We are seeing the economy flatline whilst under Labour it grew. Anyway, it was the Lib Dems who backed our call for high taxes on the rich.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I'll just clarify this again, I don't support the Tories. I am completely against flat taxes.

I do not feel comfortable being watched by CCTV all the time- I have done nothing wrong. Yet I have to pay high taxes to sustain this system. This is the way most people feel. Just like the Tories, Labour are utterly wrong on crime. Rehabilitation is the way to reduce crime- but just like the Tories, Labour believe long sentances and tougher punishment is the way forward.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Firstly, if you have done nothing wrong, what have you got to fear? CCTVs are vital in catching out criminals and most people recognize that. You don't pay taxes just to fund CCTvs but to fund our frontline public services such as education and health. If Labour are so wrong on crime why is it that crime fell by almost 50% under Labour? Tougher punishment is the way forward and SENTENCES for dangerous criminals should have their cut. You are completely out of touch!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz It's the principle. I don't want to be watched all the time. It's like a communist state. Practically, you're right, but I am not comfortable with it.

Labour are on the far right when it comes to crime. Locking up criminals to solve crime is the 18th century solution. All research- ALL research- has proven that rehabilitation reduced crime. Labour pissed a lot of public money against the wall on new prisons. Just like the Tories, they cut the weed without destroying the roots.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You put Labour on the far-left on crime, then you put Labour on the far-right of crime. You're confused! If Labour was far-right then we could use capital punishment! Research show that our criminal justice system is too weak. Prison does not really punish, it just alienates people from society. Prison should punish criminals. It's not about right or left, it is about right and wrong. Rehab is fine but punishment must still be there. Some prisons do that, some don't.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz No, I never said Labour was far left on crime. At all. I don't believe I've even talked about their crime polices before. Labour under their Liberal home secretary Roy Jenkins abolished the death penalty, legalized abortion and homosexuality, etc. Jenkins proposed rehabilitation programs, but he was blocked. Labour are just as bad as the Tories on crime. They think that long sentances and tougher punishment means more than rehabilitation. It's quite the opposite.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Firstly, you did say Labour was far-left on crime. Stop trying to take credit for Jenkins. Jenkins was a Gaitskellite at the time not a Liberal. It was Harold Wilson's policies anyway so had Jenkins been there or not, the social reforms would have happened. The Tories are weak on crime. Crime doubled under their rule, they are cutting the police by thousands and they tried to cut sentences and even some Lib Dem MPs didn't like the policy. Again, you are completely confused!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Quote me, then.

I will take credit for Jenkins. He was always a closet Liberal. He split with Labour over arguments about their far left policies. And what you said there was utterly incorrect- all of the liberal bills such as legalising abortion were HIS bills, not Wilson's. I like Wilson, but he was not a social liberal. He tolerated, rather than advocated, Jenkin's bills.

The Tories are weak on crime because they think sentacing is a priority, just as Labour do.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Firstly, you need to learn how to spell. Secondly, you have NO right to take credit for a social democrat politician. Wilson always supported Jenkins' policies it was that Jenkins was the Home Secretary at the time. They were Wilson's policies too. The fact that you like a Bevanite, goes to show the depth of your confusion. The Tories don't think sentencing is a priority. They are weak on crime. Crime doubled under their watch, under Labour it halved. You are just wrong!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Pardon me for spelling incorrectly accidently on youtube (sarcasm). Wilson did not craft those policies. Jenkins did. He split with Labour to form a 'radical center' as he called it. He was always a keynesian, but he was hardly a socialist. I recommend you read Andrew Marr's history of Britain. It gives you a detailed insight into the Wilson government.

Only rehabilitation solves long term crime. Labour & Tories have abysmal crime policies.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Well you should at least learn to spell. Perhaps if you knew anything about the history fo the Labour Party you will know Jenkins had a socialist history but he was a social democrat like me.

If our crime policies failed why did crime fall by 50%?

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight If Labour were so wrong on crime why did crime fall by 50%! I have read Andrew Marr's books and I have read many books on Jenkins. He was a social democrat, he has was Keynesian and he had socialist history. He was highly influential in the Labour Party, he was a Gaitskellite. His policies were Labour policies. By the way, you are really out of your depth!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Short term, it fell by 50%. That isn't impressive, because re-offending rates are breath-takingly high. We're talking about 60-70% here. Short term figures mean nothing. It is like cutting a weed, only for it to grow back because you haven't destroyed the root.

If Jenkins was a socialist, answer me this- why did he leave the Labour party? He was a keynesian, he did believe in certain socialist economics, but he did leave Labour. Why is that the case?

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight It is impressive that crime is at its lowest level in years. Re-offending has increased in the short-term. The Police even admit that such low crime levels are impressive, criminologists agree with me on that. Criminals should reform and I think it should be conditional on the sentence but we need rigid punishment. Jenkins was a socialist because at the time Jenkins joined Labour. He left because of the direction of the Labour Party under Michael Foot. He would have returned.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Of course short term crime has decreased- that isn't good, because re-offending rates are 70%. We will only exterminate crime in the long term if we find the resources to change the behaviour of criminals. Prison does not work- it seems everyone, except Labour & the Tories, knows that.

When Jenkins left Labour, he claimed he wanted to persue the 'radical center'. That doesn't sound like socialism to me. The Wilson government was, remember, very right wing by Labour standards.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight The Wilson government was to the right "Old Labour" and that is because it had Gaitskellites like Jenkins, Healy and Taverne. Jenkins joined Labour as a socialist, he was always centre-left. Crime is at its lowest level in decades! Prison works to fulfil its duty to punish criminals. The state cannot reform criminals, criminals have to reform themselves. There is a clear difference between Labour and the Tories. We are tough on crime, and they (you included) are weak on crime.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You can be centre-left without being a socialist. Prisons may punish criminals- but it doesn't work if it breeds enough hatred to almost always provoke the prisoners from re-offending! Labour's crime policies are childish. It is shameful that the party who outlawed the death penalty should resort to such far-right stances on crime. It's funny- all of this time, you've been accusing me of being a Tory. What you said about criminals just then sounded like Thatcher. I'm serious.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are not someone to take seriously. I do not hate prisoners, but prisoners are people they have to chose, big government should not tell them what to do. The party that outlawed death penalty is on the side of the people on crime. You are a Tory. I believe prisoners should have the opportunity to reform, but they should be punished. The fact you don't realize that is not left or right, its not even liberal. It's plain silly. Just like you.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz *sigh*. The idea that prisoners are born criminals is not just a right wing view, but a FAR right wing view. On the left, you have supporters of rehabilitation. When I see your comments on the economy, it comes from the mouth of a keynesian socialist, yet when I see your comments on crime, it is from Thatcher's mouth.

Prison does not work. This rises beyond politics. It's a fact. Prison fails to reduce crime.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight I never said prisoners are born criminals - now you're lying! This isn't an issue about politics, this is an issue about morals. I am a Keynesian (I'd be careful about using socialist) but you are on the right. Criminals should be punished but only them can define their fate. They can come out as reformed characters or they can carry on being criminals. Prison doesn't effect crime, it's the causes of crime that has an effect on crime! It's about time you grew a brain!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz That was the impression I got. My apologies if I was wrong.

No, I'm not on the right. You cannot say that I am a right winger because I support small government & low taxation.

You need physiological help in order to help a criminal change their ways. It is not 'up to them' at all. If you knew the mere basics of sociology, you would realise how 18th century that is. The cause of crime is poverty, and negative socialisation.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are painful to debate with and you're very rightwing!

Criminals are people. They need to chose which direction they need to take. Many criminals are born from poverty that is why education is so useful in our society but some criminals are rich (tax evaders). If you do wrong, you need to face the consequences, it is only then they could get a second chance.

You make up nonsentical crap and avoid questions when you are losing the argument! You're a lost cause!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You need to calm down, sonny. How old are you? Do you even understand what right wing means?

How am I losing this debate exactly? I'm presenting my arguments without an insults, whereas you are constantly insulting me, raging and storming around like a little child. Calm down, take a breath, and start debating like an adult!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight There you go. You lose out, you start lying and you try and distract yourself from the debate. I am not storming since you cannot storm on the web! I think you need a check up. I cannot stand patronizing, little rightwingers like you! Start debating and catch-up with the debate or maybe you are a bit too slow.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You are an incredibly angry young man. Take a look at our debate. I have not insulted you once. Compare my comments to yours- your comments always contain a lacklusture insult in them. You tell me that you've passed university. So why don't you act your age, and start debating like an adult!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight There is a difference between passion and anger. What is annoying is that when you lose the argument, you try and divert attention from the debate because you have caught out. You have tripped over several times you have even made up untruths. You need to grow up and catch up. I have supremely outdebated you!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz It is not passionate to throw insults at someone during a debate. You do not win a debate through insults. I have only responded with my opinion, and some facts. Please take insults out of the equation. It achieves nothing; a negative influence.

I really don't see how I've tripped up. My view is, you are so confident in your opinion that you believe it to be factual, therefore you presume I have made factual errors by disagreeing with you.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You have tripped up. You have tripped up on issues so many times you avoid the subject in fact you have changed your mind. You have made up untruths in order to try and win the debate.

You have used insults as well, but then again you and your party are full of rank hypocrites. You move from a topic when you are losing a fight, to another topic, you dodge and avoid questions in fact you trip over what you say. I can give you good examples. You are a poor debater.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz If you feel I have dodged your questioning, feel free to ask me directly now. I will try my best to answer it. But please don't accuse me of being a poor debater, seeing as you have (up until now, at last) used nearly half of your comment characters to insult me through most of the debate. But let's start again, without the nastiness, and bring a bit of credibility to the table.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Again, dodging the question. You're terrible debater since you avoid questions and move from topic to topic to avoid a question. You have an over-inflated view of yourself. I've belittled you in every way possible because you have been so hypocritical and slimy. You obviously take yourself too seriously because you have a tiny knowledge of politics and economics - not just in Britain but in America looking at your comments on Obama. You can't spell too.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz How old are you? 13? 15? You are not an economist. Economists have respect for each others views. You have no respect, boy. You are either stupid, or arrogant, to think that your opinion is factual. Once you leave your parents home, you will realise that this behaviour brings you trouble. Sort it out. And what is this obsession with correct spelling on Youtube? Are you autistic, or something?

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You aren't an economist you are a fool and you have no proof of my age whatsoever. I will not be lectured by a patronising, self-obessed, arrogant old man like yourself. You act like a two year old. You cannot answer questions factually, you dodge questions and you insult people in your arrogant attitude. The fact you use autism as something to be mocked shows that you are not just a fool politically or economically but that you are a sick lowlife. Sort yourself out, mate!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You, sir, are a joke. You think that you are clever, and that you now economics, by repeating the rhetorics of Ed Bollocks. Perhaps I am patronising- but how exactly am I self obsessed? How am I arrogant? You're the arrogant one, sonny jim. You call me an idiot for not supporting your socialist opinion. Balls to that, I say, pardon the pun. You say I do not understand politics, yet your Tory video was laughably ignorant, and you abuse & nitpick the polls to suit your needs.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You can call people socialist but you support nationalisation. You have little understanding about economics or politics, you are completely out of touch with the public and you haven't backed up your comments. You're extremely puerile, I could believe you are not an adult. The worse thing is you are so ignorant and stupid you can't see it. You're a pathological liar, a hypocrite and you obviously are confused. You need help, mate - you've also created a new account!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You, sir, are an authoritarian free speech-hating communist! You find it OK to block me to prevent me from expressing my opinions, yet you feel you can come to my channel and troll! That is why I needed the other account.

I support nationalization of the forests, and the health service- that does not make me a socialist!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Explain how I am an authoritarian when I believe in civil liberties. Explain how I am against free speech when I have campaigned on this issue, explain how I am a commie when I support the private sector. You are a clueless idiot. You have spoken out of both sides of your mouth, you have lied and have been totally hypocritical! Then you used the 'other account' to literally preach abuse. I have the freedom to block you, if I dislike you! Bugger off! You want to destroy the NHS!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Preach abuse? PREACH ABUSE? Oh the hypocrisy! I have given up debating with you, foul sir, because you have done nothing but PREACH ABUSE at me for the last few months! Unbelievable! This is like when Hitler accused Churchill of being a 'vile amoral creature'!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You started it, mate. Look at your first comments. You preached about being calm, I have ridiculed you and you have preached abuse not just to me but even to others. You are such a hypocrite and a compulsive liar. You are also an IDIOT who knows nothing about politics, history or economics. You know nothing about liberalism, David Lloyd-George or about the deficit and how it should reduced. I thought you were a progressive intellectual, you are a mad Thatcherite. You're sick!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight How dare you compare me to Hitler. You are the one who is extremely on the right, not me.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I'll compare you to Hitler. You're an oppressive twat who hates freedom of speech. And you shout down people who disagree with you. I'm doing you a favour by shouting back, you know. It will put you in your place, you arrogant little boy. I'm doing you a favour because one day someone will knock the shit out of you for being so rude.

You don't even know what it is to be right wing. Not a single opinion I have expressed indicated that I am a right-wing person. Tribal communist!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are a so close-minded, arrogant, childish and infantile! I am not oppressive. You are rude, arrogant, close-minded, hypocritical, dishonest and you know nothing. I campaign for free speech actually. Everything that you have said points to the Right. If anyone is a Nazi, its you! You share many qualities with Hittler!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz YES YOU ARE, because I allow you to troll shit all over my comments page, because I love freedom & free speech, whereas YOU block me and stop me from doing to same to you. There is no other reason- you hate free speech. You remind me of Napoleon Bonaparte, a guy who would keep the press under his iron grip to control the minds of the masses!

Many qualities with Hitler? How so? You support his economic policy- I can say that much!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are like my 2-year-old nephew. To make an analogy with the man who killed millions, with someone who is restricting someone from his page - which is a basic freedom and right - is childish, foolish and nonsentical. This proves you want to remove basic freedoms from people similar to what Hitler did. I support a deficit reduction strategy which is fair, that has nothing at all to do with Nazism, you uninformed twat!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz We need higher inflation in order for people to readjust their spending on a household income level- under Labour, private debt expanded massively!

You are a fool! High inflation was used in the past to wipe out debts, like in 1945, the 1920s, the 1870s, even the great depression. You are a fool who believes anything Ed Bollocks says. I have met him in person- he was arrogant and uninformed. He told me that we should follow the American model of deficit reduction- LOL!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You again have avoided the initial point and dodged the bullet! Higher inflation hurts small businesses, lower and middle incomes and growth. It does not clear debt, it makes it even harder to cut debt. In the 40s and the Great Depression it was employment and investment that cured the economies then. I disagree with Balls on many issues, but he is right deficit reduction, you are arrogant and uninformed not him so shut up. Are you saying you know more than Balls?

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Of course it does! But it worked in the 30s, didn't it? We may not have a choice. Governments can only control inflation by controlling the money supply!

You're a retard. The reason countries got out of the great depression was because of war employment. That is the truth about Roosevelts Keyenesian new deal. If you look at the figures, his plan failed until war broke out and there were loads of jobs created.

Everyone knows more than Balls- I think you do, as well.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight The fact is that you do not know more than economist who has had first class degrees from Oxford, Harvard and LSE. I doubt you even studied anything! The New Deal restored CONFIDENCE something that rightwing retards like you simply don't comprehend. You support high inflation, that is retarded. We do have a choice, look at VAT for example. Look at public sector pay and wages. I know these things because I studied it, you seem to absolutely nothing! Nothing at all!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz The new deal was a failure, because employment did not substaintially increase until the 1940s when the US entered the war. Worse than that, is was a sexist & racist program aimed purely at white workers.

Support high inflation? No. But high inflation will reduce the deficit. That is what I am saying.

Where is the money going to come from for a VAT tax cut, then? You are like a Labour party advertisment machine, spewing their catch phrases from your mouth.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Just because the New Deal had racist elements, it doesn't mean it wasn't an economic success because employment increased and confidence was boosted something that Hooverites like you don't acknowledge. Nonsense, about inflation. It will throw the economy of course because it will make the deficit harder to cut meaning that interest rates. I might sound like a 'catchphrase' machine but at least I am talking sense.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight On the VAT cut, well its ashame that you want high taxes for the poor. The VAT cut costs only £12bn. That is the amount of money the Coalition has borrowed in order to pay for rising welfare bills. The VAT cut would create 350,000 jobs meaning we'll gain more through tax, and we'll spend less on welfare. Also consumer confidence and business confidence will boost which in turn will boost growth. It will also lead to disinflation. The IMF backs it and it'll also help the poor!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Come on now, a million of the poorest earners have been liften out of income tax! The real class that will suffer from the tax rises are the middle classes, but the Tories will probably cut taxes once the budget is in surplus again (osborne will use that as a cheap election winning thing).

VAT cut to create 350,000 jobs? Don't make me laugh. I would have found the money somewhere else personally, but we can't reverse a tax increase like that now, we would look like fools

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Bollocks. Child poverty is rising by 11%, the poor are being hurt hardest, poorer boroughs are taking deeper cuts than rich boroughs! Don't repeat the Osborne mantra to me - I know he's your only friend! The deficit has grown under the Tories, and he is missing his target so there is no sign of a surplus! CIPD have confirmed that 350,000 jobs were lost under the VAT rise! We must reverse the tax rise if we want disinflation, growth, a reduced deficit, helping the poor and jobs!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz There will be a budget surplus by about 2017. By 2015, the deficit will have shrank enough for tax cuts to be a realistic option. But no, he will definitely not eliminate the deficit by the end of this parliament. That was far too ambitious a target in the first place.

Substantial numbers of jobs are already being created in the private sector- which is what we need! There have been FAR too much public sector jobs under Labour- we have a bigger state than communist China!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight If we get a surplus at 2017 it will still mean failure. The deficit is higher, unemployment is too high and we're flatlining. Again, you've U-Turned and twisted in less than a day! Remarkable! You are so inconsistent! Jobs aren't being created in the private sector, unemployment is high. The VAT rise has cost us thousands of jobs. Under Labour, we had investment in our services but to say we had a bigger state than China, demonstrates you chat complete and utter BOLLOCKS!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Failure for Osborne, fine. It would be a massive success for anyone (except socialists, of course) else.

The fact you don't already know that we have a larger state than communist China is surprising. I knew that, even when I supported Labour. To be fair though, China is not actually communist.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You certainly are the most inconsistent, arrogant, rude, puerile, unintelligent person I have ever come across. You were saying how the international markets have confidence in Osborne and you have supported it several times. Now, you have conceded to admit its failure and you said its 'over-ambitous'. Idiot. You have no clue. Admit the deficit is higher than its was under Labour. Now you have made another fact which is utter bullshit.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz The sheer hypocrisy of it all. Bear in mind that whilst I tried to have a reasonable debate with you, you refused to take it seriously and instead pounded me with childish insult after childish insult, always refusing to debate like an adult. You will pay the price for that.

What the fuck are you on about? The international markets have confidence that our government can pay back its debts. China has a smaller relative government than the UK. Fact.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Who the fuck do you think you are? You never try to have a reasonable debate with anyone, I have seen your exchanges with others. YOU paid the price for it, and you are not just a hypocrite but a liar because you cannot face you lost the debate. In fact, you've just made up a fact about China. You've got no clue. The international markets fear double-dip in Britain due to a flat-lininng economy - something you said was a good thing. Inconsistent, incoherent, idiotic - you!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I was trying to argue reasonably with you up until about a month ago. I never insulted you- not once! But all I got back from you was abusive trolling, 'you're a silly runt who sucks up to the coalition', for example. So I started a verbal blitzkreig against you. Fair enough, isn't it. I'm willing to stop if you are- be my guest.

Chinese income tax for earners of 30-60 grand a year is 30%. Compare that with the UK, who charge 40-50%. The Chinese state, relatively, is bigger!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight No you really weren't mate, then again I have already estalished you have issues. I don't think I said "you're a silly runt who sucks up to the coalition" (even though you are) but I would be glad to see exactly where I said it. You verbal blitzreig started months ago, then you decided to keep it on the down-low and then it resurrected. You started this not just on me, but even on other users! Basing the size of the state merely on tax is stupid. Now, stop acting like a twat!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Please, pick any of my comments with the exception of the ones in the last week. You will find no insults at all. I'm convinced that you were imagining that I was mirroring your abusive behaviour, for whatever reason.

What do you mean on other users? The only argument I have going on is with stupid Americans about whether or not they saved us in the first world war.

Economically, our state is bigger than China's.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight There are several insults. You have got in fights with your fellow Tories, over AV (you were both wrong) and you have insulted him. You insulted me on some of your videos for example and on your comment page. China is a different economy that ours. They have more people, they have very vibrant sectors therefore they can afford lower taxes even though for the Chinese it might be too high. We don't have that in this country, therefore it is ludicrous make that silly assumption!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Lol, I didn't insult you in perticular though. Why does that give you the right to insult me?

Why are you looking up my comments on other videos? It seems a bit like you are mentally disabled, some sort of obesssion. You take youtube very seriously, don't you?

China- a socialist state- has lower taxes than the UK. So yes, Labour are very left wing. Authoritarian and freedom hating, setting up as many rules as possible over a household, enforcing with strict sentances.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Calm down, dear and learn to spell. Your comments are strewn with many spelling mistakes as they are with factual mistakes which is similar to that of a primary schoolchild or a retard. The latter one is the best description. The fact you can take disability as an issue to play with shows you're vile. You to be too thick to understand that China has a larger population therefore they can afford to have lower taxes and people are richer. Britain is not the same. Get a life!

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight The fact you think Labour is freedom-hating and extreme authoritarian shows that you are clearly a thick individual. Labour is a left-of-centre, progressive, social democratic party which believes in active government but strong communities. You have a simplistic and mendacious mindset. You are in denial over the deficit, you are clearly confused over so many issues and you are an idiot. You also are a vile human being too as well as a boy with a void for a brain! Stupid Tory!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Labour have created so many laws regulating what people are allowed to do, socially & economically, that power is taken away from the individual. It started with Attlee, actually. His government dealt blows to poverty, diseise and injustice, but it also took massive amounts of power away from the ordinary man.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight An overexaggeration of the facts. Under the Atlee government, Britain joined the ECHR. Nationalization, founding the post-war welfare state and creating the NHS isn't massive regulation. They did deal blows to DISEASE, poverty and injustice with the help of the great true Liberal, William Beveridge! But this doesn't excuse the fact you have refused to mention the deficit purely because you're in denial so you want to talk about the micro in order to avoid the macro! Weak!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Local government under Labour in the late 1940's was all but destroyed. Government became ultra centralised. Our economy was a mess too, but that was America's fault (curse Truman), so I'm not even going to bother getting into a debate about that. The point is, under Labour's ideology, centralised government is considered more important than personal liberty. Whatever you say, Labour are certainly not champions of liberty. The number of regulations under new Labour was outstanding

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight It seems like you're ignoring me again. Your talking about the MICRO, to avoid talking about the MACRO. I've asked you time and time again about the deficit, but you want to ignore it. Labour actually created the LCC (which became the GLC scrapped under Thatcher)! That's not centralisation. Under Labour, Britain joined the ECHR. Under Labour, we've got the Human Rights Act (which Cameron wants to scrap). So on that point - you're wrong. But what would you do about the deficit?

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I'm not talking about economics on this perticular discussion. I'm talking about personal freedom, which decreased substaintially under Attlee's Labour government. That is a fact. You are an idiot for thinking Labour do not support centralisation of government just because they have devolved administrations in Wales & Scotland. That has nothing to do with their principal ideology, which is that the state should act as a regulator and tell families how to act.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Well, I am mentioning economics in this PARTICULAR discussion. You've preached utter nonsense, and I'm trying to say that with as my respect as I can. To say Labour tried to micromanage families in ludicrous. Personal freedom didn't decrease, yes under New Labour civil liberties were tightened - which was wrong, but devolution to communities and people is part of the argument.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Not just wrong- utterly criminal and barbaric. Civil liberties should be untouched. But of course, socialist Labour has no respect for liberty. Everyone knows this except hardcore socialists like you. The reason you don't understand is because you don't think liberty is a big issue.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You are thick! Civil liberties have been touched since before New Labour. I am saying Labour got the balance wrong on civil liberties. Explain if Labour has no regard for civil liberties why did they introduce the Human Rights Act? Why is it that two Cabinet ministers worked in Liberty? Of course, liberty is a big issue but so is crime and Labour failed to see the balance. Firstly, many of the "hardcore socialists" campaigned for civil liberties! You need to stop!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz 'you are thick'. Boo fucking hoo. Can't you be more creative?

Don't get me wrong, the Tories want to impose a disgusting Christian moral code into our society. That makes me sick. We essentially have the choice between the Tories, who want repulsive religion in our society, and Labour, who hate civil liberties because they think it means nothing compared to centralised government against poverty & disease.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight You're not waving but drowning! Many Tories aren't Christians, what on earth are you on about? Are you drunk or have you had a lobotomy? Labour don't hate civil liberties or why would two civil libertarian Cabinet ministers serve in a Labour government and why did they introduce some civil libertarian laws. You have no regard for poverty, disease, employment or crime! You've just let the cat out of the bag, mate. You are a lunatic, that's exactly what you are!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz LOL! Cameron's catchphrases now, then?

If you don't accept the Tories are the pro-Christian party, you know fuck all about their history. The very reason they exist is because of a dispute with the Whigs over the divine right to kings to rule, regarding god. Hague, Cameron, Osborne, Clarke, May, Fox, Duncan Smith, Lansley, and Gove are ALL religious- pretty much the entire cabinet.

I consider freedom to be more important than crime and employment yes. That is the liberal view.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Again, not waving but drowning. You really have very little knowledge about politics. Osborne is not a Christian, by the way another factual error like many of your comments. There are religious peopple in all parties. The Tories don't want to force Christianity onto Britain, that is just a myth again complete lunacy.

The fact that you basically have no regard for poverty, crime or employment shows you basically have no regard for society and therefore no regard for freedom!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Osborne not a Christian? So why did he choose the Church of England line in parliament?

/watch?v=ajhGKULHxcI

The Tories want to use repulsive Christian family values like that marriage tax break thing to make our society less secular.

I have regard for poverty, crime and employment. I just have a different way of solving the problem to you. And because you're FUCKING arrogant, you think I'm wrong, merely for having a different opinion.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Is Baroness Warsi as Christian? There are atheists in the Government too. Many Christians don't believe in tax cuts. The thing is you have no way of solving any problem. I asked you about a key problem - the deficit - and you failed to reply several times. You have no regard for poverty or crime. You think its fine for low wages, whilst the rich get tax cuts and inflation increases. You want to shrink the state so that those who need to state are alone! Get a grip.

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Oh, what's the matter? Ashamed to admit I just proved you wrong?

Baroness Warsi is vile.

Here you go again, in your presumption ways! Where is the proof that I support low wages for the poor? You are a mentally ill ape.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Oh grow up! The point is Warsi is not a Christian, why would she be Chairman of an extremist Christian party? Again you lack logic, and proved wrong. You seem to convinvce yourself that your lies are true. You do support low wages for the poor. You want high inflation and you've shown no support for a living wag. You want the rich to have tax cuts! Don't take the mick out of mental illness! You are vile creature and your mother should have got rid of you from birth!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz You have been humiliated in this conversation. You told me Osborne was not a Christian, and I completely owned you. You said that Thatcher's government was an economic failure, and that Labour were responsible for low inflation in the last 13 years, everyone knows you're a fool. Your insults are weaker than a dwarf with parkinsons, yet you fill up 2/3 of your comments with them. Why don't you use the comment space for actual argument, or your opinion, instead of shitty insults?

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight No, you haven't you've lost mate. From what I know Osborne isn't a Christian, but I will see the oaths. Then again, some people use Anglican oaths but they aren't Christians. I never specifically said Tahtcher's government was economic failure and I do believe that Labour managed an economy with low inflation. The fact you are taking the mick of people with disabilties show that you are a sick individual and you still haven't rebutted my point on Warsi. You've lost!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz I've decided I am wasting far too much time on you, and our conversations are ruining several videos. Therefore, I am ignoring all but two of your comments from now on, and both of them must be on my videos, therefore treating these video creators with some respect.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight That is the sign of defeat. It goes to show that you lacked respect in the first place since you started these fights on other users' videos and it is about time you admitted it. On the other hand, I would like to thank you for conceding to defeat and I think your hypocrisy, stupidity and pure deficit of knowledge should no longer be exposed for the world to see. I wish you well in your primary school education, one day you will learn politics and economics but not now. :)

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz Fine, I'll admit I started the argument on this video, but you have started a few with me, on other videos. I have the respect to finish the argument here, and you should to.

I know your problem. You have scratched the surface of economics, and you think that you are an expert. Most teenagers are like that. But I am sat here pissing myself, because you have absoloutely no idea what you are on about. You know more about politics than economics.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight Thanks very much, for your admission but the only arguments I've started where after you decided to stalk my comments and provoke an argument so just forget riding on the moral high ground, because it doesn't work. I have studied economics, mate, firstly I'm not a teenager - you seem to have a delusional misunderstanding - but secondly, you've made so many gaffes, its bloody unbelievable. You are just a real pain, and if you knew my problem, you'll know that its you!

[TheLiberalKnight]

@CookieCrumblz We are both to blame for starting arguments on other people's videos. Let's end it here, I'm not reading the rest of your comment.

[CookieCrumblz]

@TheLiberalKnight No, you are to blame, don't you dare try to even shift the blame on me you lying little bastard. Learn some responsibility and take the blame. Grow up and stop trying to 'compromise' with me. YOU - alone - started to prompt arguments on other people's videos who have complained - you and YOU alone. Now, admit it or are you going to keep on being the cowardly little turd you have always been.

[ellhow]

Thankfully it did not stick thanks to "Nick Cleggover"