Gordon Brown

[jucyberry]

did any one watch the Piers morgan prog last night? I see today that he is getting flack for 'trying' to appear human, and that he is comprimising (sp) his integrity by showing his emotional side. Personally I have always been slightly ambivilant about him as a person, he is the man at the head and so forth..

However, after watching him last night, and comparing him to the slimey, oily, greasy, look at me I can cry at will, Blair(who I loathed) then I know who I would rather have heading the government. I thought he came across very well..Charming in an almost gauche way..after all, he needs to be seen to lead, not make love to his country...

I guess if Tony was the wet french kiss, then Gordon is surely the kiss on the back of the hand type of PM..

[CusworthRovers]

I saw a smidgen after I had watched Sherlock Holmes. Not sure if I'm being old school here ie they should always be at a distance and it gives you a feeling that they are untouchable/all powerful (a bit like the Queenie). ....or is it we must move with the times and see what they do on a day to basis and have them portrayed before the Nations subjects almost daily.

[jucyberry]

I get the feeling that compassion showed by Brown would be the real deal, unlike Blair who turns it on for the cameras.




And on an aside, wow what a cracking film, Sherlock Holmes I mean.

[jonrover]

I was expecting a bit of a blood bath to be honest, but in my opinion he did pretty well considering he is far from natural in front of the camera. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if it even helped close the gap a bit in the opinion polls.
I really feel sorry for Gordon. He has been burdened with a messy financial situation, which wasn't of his doing, and burdened with another American instigated war, which will never be won and will win Britain more enemies than allies.
One of my wife's friends knows him very well from the start of his political career through her father who had some role within the Labour Party and describes him as one of the most genuine and intelligent people you will ever wish to meet. Unfortunately, I doubt that will mean anything come May when that Thatcherite Cameron and his Eton chums will come in and completely screw the working class and try to finish the job Thatcher started on the Unions once and for all.

[jucyberry]

I have to say, I really liked him.. I thought the press reports mocking him crying were not only cruel but totally exagerated.. what right have a bunch of hacks who are both socially and morally deviod of compassion got to mock anyone who has suffered the loss of a much loved child, and what right have they to say Jennifer should be brushed under the carpet. She was and still obviously is a huge part of the Brown's lives.

[NorthNorfolkRover]

For gods sake he was in charge of the treasury all through the Blair years :S



jonrover wrote:
[. He has been burdened with a messy financial situation, which wasn't of his doing, and burdened with another American instigated war, which will never be won and will win Britain more enemies than allies.

[danrover82]

Watched it all, and felt for the guy. He's had troubles like everyone, especially with his daughter and sons illness which I can realte to as my son was severly ill when born and still has his heart condition.

It was refreshing to see a man in charge of the country have true emotions. He is not the reason we had the global meltdown and has done a great job in my opimion of sorting it out (something alot of world leaders also support). We still have a fantastic NHS and given a full term on his own merit I believe he could go down in history as one of the finest PM's this country has had. I dont think Last nights programme did any harm, infact i believe its helped him. Lets just hope he Camoron (play on words)does one a makes himself look a bigger d**k.

Exciting times ahead.

[jonrover]

NorthNorfolkRover wrote:

For gods sake he was in charge of the treasury all through the Blair years :S



jonrover wrote:
[. He has been burdened with a messy financial situation, which wasn't of his doing, and burdened with another American instigated war, which will never be won and will win Britain more enemies than allies.

Did the credit crunch happen during Blair's years as PM? So what's your point exactly?

Granted, Brown and Charles Darling were left to pick up the pieces after the financial meltdown thanks to the banks taking stupid risks, but what exactly could they have done differently? Leave them to rot and take peoples savings and properties down with them?

The only thing I don't agree with is every single penny any of the bailed out banks make in profit should be ploughed straight back into the government's coffers to pay off the debt plus interest, even if it takes 200 years. Instead our public sector face savage cuts regardless who is in power come May. I think things are going to get pretty messy...

[BillyStubbsTears]

NorthNorfolkRover wrote:

For gods sake he was in charge of the treasury all through the Blair years :S

That'll be the decade when we had unprecedented stable continuous economic growth won't it? The decade when our economy sailed through the Russian debt default, the South Asian economic meltdown, the Argentinian debt default, the bursting of the dot com bubble, the post 9/11 worldwide recession. The decade in which our economic growth never once slipped outside a sensible band of 1.5-3.5% per year, while those of America, Japan, Germany, France, Italy etc oscillated wildly between boom and recession.

Every single one of the major developed countries had recessions during the Blair years. Apart from the country that had Brown as its Chancellor. Go check the figures. They are easy enough to find.

Actually, you should apply for the job as Brown's head of PR. If the Labour Party actually shouted from the rooftops that it was Brown who was responsible for the most stable economic decade that anyone alive has ever known, they'd wipe the floor with Cameron and his economically illiterate Shadow Chancellor. That's the smug Eton Debating Society champion. The one who was screaming for us to drastically cut public spending as the world tipped into the worst recession in 80 years. Funny how not a single developed country followed that lead int it? Probably because they all knew that those policies would have resulted in a million more on the dole by now and turned a very bad recession into a Great Depression.

God help us, but Osbourne will get a chance to make real economic decisions from later in this year. Given that his previous economic experience amounts to totting up the tuck shop takings in the Eton Senior Common Room, and the only time he ever applied for a proper job, he failed the interview to become a journalist, he seems wonderfully well qualified for the job...

[Boomstick]

We talking about this guy here?

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VaP1HB7Vew&feature=related[/video][video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iPaiylUYW0[/video][video]http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQVF9s01NYI&feature=related[/video]
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gi7qqvRlY0&feature=related[/video]



     
Another term? no chance.

[BillyStubbsTears]

To go back to the theme of the thread (and answer your point Boomstick in my usual rapier-like way) we have a serious issue with how we treat our politicians these days.

We want them to be celebrities. We want them to be saints. We want them to be ordinary family guys. We want them to be dressed by Versace, but not spend any money. We want their shit to smell of CK1, for them never to scratch their arse, pick their nose or fluff a line.

All because, in general, we are too f**king idle and thick to actually connect with the difficult, real issues that politicians are supposed deal with. So it's easier to snigger about their personal character.

I wonder what we'd make of Churchill these days? A warmongering, borderline alcoholic and fully fledged bigot, who was prone to massive bouts of depression and had a face like a bulldog licking piss of another bulldog's ring piece after it had been repeatedly kicked in the knackers by Giant Haystacks. And he called his wife \"Pussy\".
 
I suspect he wouldn't last two minutes these days before the press were mocking his style sense and some clever t**t was posting YouTube videos of him sticking his V-sign up the wrong way.

[Boomstick]

BillyStubbsTears wrote:

To go back to the theme of the thread (and answer your point Boomstick in my usual rapier-like way) we have a serious issue with how we treat our politicians these days.

We want them to be celebrities. We want them to be saints. We want them to be ordinary family guys. We want them to be dressed by Versace, but not spend any money. We want their shit to smell of CK1, for them never to scratch their arse, pick their nose or fluff a line.

All because, in general, we are too fcuking idle and thick to actually connect with the difficult, real issues that politicians are supposed deal with. So it's easier to snigger about their personal character.

I wonder what we'd make of Churchill these days? A warmongering, borderline alcoholic and fully fledged bigot, who was prone to massive bouts of depression and had a face like a bulldog licking piss of another bulldog's ring piece after it had been repeatedly kicked in the knackers by Giant Haystacks. And he called his wife \"Pussy\".
 
I suspect he wouldn't last two minutes these days before the press were mocking his style sense and some clever t**t was posting YouTube videos of him sticking his V-sign up the wrong way.

    . So its ok for a PM to be a bumbling idiot. Well there's even hope for you then.
What about 'no more boom and bust'? Or the fact that manufacturing has declined SIGNIFICANTLY more in the last 10 years under Blair/Brown than during the thatcher years.
How can 10 years of growth be good if it was debt fuelled, and ended in an almighty crash to end up worse than when we started. Then to spend our way out of it, to then quickly cut the spending. The next 10 years will be very slow, growth very minimal and we'll be paying the price in high taxes, and the continuation of punishing the prudent savers with the low interest rates.
But hey, its all alright because churchill looked like a bulldog  phew.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Pointless I know, but it pains me to see witless b*llocks spouted as FACT so I can't let it rest.

Where to begin?

What about 'no more boom and bust'?.

You clearly have not the faintest idea what this quote was about. The economic history of this country from WWII onwards was one of wild oscillations between unsustainable booms followed by inevitable and deep recessions. For ten years, Brown's stewardship entirely ironed out these wild swings. I'll repeat. No other country in the developed world managed to do that. The recession that we (and the rest of the world - I know you're a Little Englander, but do look around a bit will you) have suffered was NOT in any way like these previous ones. It did NOT follow on from an unsustainable boom. As I've pointed out earlier, we had a decade of very sensible, entirely sustainable growth.

How can 10 years of growth be good if it was debt fuelled, and ended in an almighty crash to end up worse than when we started.

Utter, absolute and demonstrable b*llocks. Our debt levels are still very low by international standards. Go check the figures. They are easy to find.
And World Trade Organisation figures show that the current level of UK GDP even AFTER this recession is 29% higher than it was in 1997.

Or the fact that manufacturing has declined SIGNIFICANTLY more in the last 10 years under Blair/Brown than during the thatcher years.

Show me your figures and we'll discuss. If you don't have any figures, just the usual pub-bore ejaculations, then we'll ignore.

[The Red Baron]

The argument about GDP is not a very strong one. Yes, GDP is higher than it was in 1997. However, in 1997 it was significantly higher than it was in 1979. By those yardsticks, the Tory Government was a success. You can't have it both ways!

What is of more concern is that GDP is actually forecast to FALL in 2010 for the first time in living memory. That didn't happen in the 80s and 90s, despite two (at least) bruising recessions. Now we can argue until the cows come home about who's fault that is- the bankers, the Thatcher government, the present administration- but it is not a pretty picture.

In addition, National Debt as a % of GDP is on course to reach its highest levels since the late 60s (when we were still paying off the ruinous costs of WW2). So whoever is in power after the next election will have to deal with an economic mess.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The Red Baron wrote:

The argument about GDP is not a very strong one. Yes, GDP is higher than it was in 1997. However, in 1997 it was significantly higher than it was in 1979. By those yardsticks, the Tory Government was a success. You can't have it both ways!

My comment on GDP was in response to that ridiculous statement by Boomstick that after the recent recession we \"end up worse than when we started\". It's symptomatic of the age that we big everything up to be far more momentous than it actually is. After the worst worldwide crash in 80 years, our current GDP is actually at about the level it was at in late 2005. That dort of effect is pretty much on a par with previous recessions. The enormous difference  THIS time is that, because of Government action to ameliorate the worst effects the recession has NOT been accompanied by 3.5million unemployed. Plus, for the only time in anyone's lifetime, the last decade, prior to the worldwide financial collapse, saw our economy as tranquil as a millpond. I've got a graph if you want me to put it up, showing the widl peaks and troghs of GDP growth for the last 70 years, until the late 1990s, when the line becamed ironed-flat smooth. No other developed country had such a stable period as we did. Does Brown deserves no credit for that remarakable feat?

What is of more concern is that GDP is actually forecast to FALL in 2010 for the first time in living memory. That didn't happen in the 80s and 90s, despite two (at least) bruising recessions. Now we can argue until the cows come home about who's fault that is- the bankers, the Thatcher government, the present administration- but it is not a pretty picture.

Not really sure what you are talking about here. GDP fell in 2009. And 1981. And 1991. That's the definition of a recession. If you are really stating that GDP is forecast to fall THROUGHOUT the 2010s decade, then you need to change your newspaper. That will NOT happen, and you will not find any credible economist saying this, or anything remotely like it. You might find it in the doom-laden Daily Mail comment pages, but that's about the only place. And it goes without saying that there's politicking going on here. It is entirely in the interests of the Tory party and their supporters to play up the economic troubles a) because it'll help them get elected and b) because when things turns out to be not so bad, they can claim credit for a miraculous turn-round.

In addition, National Debt as a % of GDP is on course to reach its highest levels since the late 60s (when we were still paying off the ruinous costs of WW2). So whoever is in power after the next election will have to deal with an economic mess.

I'm tempted to say \"So what?\" Our overall level of National Debt is still well below that of the USA, France, Germany, Italy, Japan. Why should we be panicking about this to a greater extent than they are? Yet more Little Englander insularity going on in the debate about debt I'm afraid.

[Old Popsider]

Well, I've read this thread and marvelled at the well thought out and expressed opinions and arguements.

Who says football supporters are a bunch of ignoramuses? Reading how some of the points are put over, I am assuming that there are a couple of business connected chaps contributing them.

I reckon that we can safely assume that the conclusion is Brown is a crap Prime Minister but a good Chancellor. Maybe he can be 'poached' by whoever gets in at the next election and installed as their Chancellor! Seriously, an economy doesn't turn sour overnight but has to suffer long term downturns and mis-management plus poor judgements. Fair enough, the analysts say that the recession is ending but tell that to my overstretched bank account that is struggling to pay my ever rising bills.

Blair & Brown have screwed this country big time, with their obsessional ever rising tax burden on both business and personal taxation.

They've also screwed it by encouraging councils to give out benefits to every lazy scrounger of any nationality that comes along and hold out their begging bowl. Just this morning the headline in the Express is 'Fury at Mum on £100,00 a year benefits'. This Muslim woman is single, has six kids and lives in a £2m mansion in Maida Vale, London. The article lists how the money is given out to her and how she became a tenant in that mansion. This woman would not have been able to claim such benefits if the Labour party had not made available such benefits available in the first place.

In my  opinion, and may I re-iterate my opinion before I get sued for libel, most politicians are only in it for themselves and whatever they can just legally get away with in the way of salary enhancements by way of expenses claims. They make out they are representing their constituent's best interests but they by and large are self centered spongers who couldn't give a toss how the general voting public of this country live, as long as they are alright.

Whoever gets voted in this time around will have spouted what they think the general public wants to hear and catch those votes. I won't be voting for a mainstream party. English National whatever they're called party will be the one - and no, not the BNP. They are something else.

Better stop now, the plot is changing!

[NorthNorfolkRover]

Brown was one of the causes of the credit crunch  The bankers bought new labour with little sweeties like Blairs £500,000pa non exec directorship with Goldman Sachs to allow them to operate regulation free and pay themselves what they wanted by dubious financial instruments that everyone knew were not sustainable. Hedge funds, private equity Brown encouraged all of it.
What I don't understand and perhaps you people who back him could explain to me is how folk from a traditionally \"working class\" area can support him when hes sold this country down the river on every front re immigration, social issues, morality , economically and the environment.

PS - If youre not convinced then watch his out of control pre election spending collapse the currency and everyone will be paying higher mortgage rates for his corruption and incompetence.



jonrover wrote:

NorthNorfolkRover wrote:

For gods sake he was in charge of the treasury all through the Blair years :S



jonrover wrote:
[. He has been burdened with a messy financial situation, which wasn't of his doing, and burdened with another American instigated war, which will never be won and will win Britain more enemies than allies.

Did the credit crunch happen during Blair's years as PM? So what's your point exactly?

Granted, Brown and Charles Darling were left to pick up the pieces after the financial meltdown thanks to the banks taking stupid risks, but what exactly could they have done differently? Leave them to rot and take peoples savings and properties down with them?

The only thing I don't agree with is every single penny any of the bailed out banks make in profit should be ploughed straight back into the government's coffers to pay off the debt plus interest, even if it takes 200 years. Instead our public sector face savage cuts regardless who is in power come May. I think things are going to get pretty messy...

[BillyStubbsTears]

NorthNorfolkRover wrote:

Brown was one of the causes of the credit crunch  

Phew. I never realised that we in Britain still had the power to affect the whole world. I suspect it will come as a surprise to the Americans, the Japanese, the Singaporeans, the Italians and the Greeks that it was all down to Brown.

Of course, what actually turned the credit crunch into a full-blown global catastrophe was the incompetent handling of Lehman Brothers by Bush's administration. By leaving it to the markets (as Cameron and Osbourne were shouting that we should have doen with Northern Rock) they allowed global confidence in the entire banking system to evaporate overnight. When the seismic wave that came from this decision hit Britain, Brown by contrast took immediate action to underpin the banking system.

You may not like the idea of us bailing the banks out, but you'd have liked it a damn sight less if we HADN'T done that. Every single major country in the world has followed Brown's lead since then, and it is THAT which has stopped the world spiralling into a 1930s style Great Depression.

That's not just MY opinion. The Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman said at the time in the New York Times

\"The Brown government has shown itself willing to think clearly about the financial crisis, and act quickly on its conclusions. And this combination of clarity and decisiveness hasn’t been matched by any other Western government, least of all our own. The British government went straight to the heart of the problem — and moved to address it with stunning speed. Luckily for the world economy, Gordon Brown and his officials are making sense. And they may have shown us the way through this crisis.\"

But maybe you're a better economist than Krugman.

Thank the Lord that Osbourne was not the one making decisions at that time, or we'd be back to the days of the Jarrow Marches.

[rtid88]

My god BST, you are an incredibly intelligent guy!! And I agree whole heartedly with what you have to say!

The longer Brown has been PM the more he has grown on me in terms of his personality and the way he is running the country. As everything these days the press are constantly incredibly hard on harsh to him and he does not deserve the majority of the things that are said about him in the national tabloids!!

I hope to god the bloody conservatives don't get in, as they will drag this country down, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Potentially both myself (working for a PCT in the NHS) and my wife (working for a Surestart Childrens Centre) will be out of a job in months of them coming into power!

I just hope the people of britain see sense and do not vote these bunch of pompous idiots in, who have not got a clue what the people of Britain want and have never lived in the real world!!

[Old Popsider]

NorthNorfolkRover - What I don't understand and perhaps you people who back him could explain to me is how folk from a traditionally \"working class\" area can support him when hes sold this country down the river on every front re immigration, social issues, morality , economically and the environment

Well said that man. Gordon Brown has to be the worst Prime Minister in living memory.

[danrover82]

Old Popsider wrote:

Well said that man. Gordon Brown has to be the worst Prime Minister in living memory.

I want some of your dose! GB has lead the world out of this global mess, and has been the one that most countries have looked up to in admiration of the way he's takled it, they certainly dont think worst PM ever.  You will no doubt have a few people around you who have benefited from him under Blair and no doubt through his direction now.

The man may not be good in front of the camera or hug a hoodie (which in my opinion he looks $h*t scared through that false smug smile)



 but the fact is under any other government, we the working class are fcuked. Job losses even higher, worse spending cuts for the NHS, Eductaion suffering, elderly left to rot. Is this a gamble worth taking.... I thought not.