Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: MattyDRFC on May 10, 2010, 05:40:52 pm
-
Taken from Sky news website
Gordon Brown has said he will step down as leader as Nick Clegg asks for talks between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.In a statement outside Downing Street, Mr Brown said he had \"no desire to stay in my position longer than needed\" and would leave by the party conference in September.
He said he will ask the Labour Party to begin the process for a leadership election but that he will not stand or intervene.
Mr Brown said the fact there was a hung parliament suggested no party or leader had the support of the electorate to govern alone.
\"As leader of my party I must accept that that is a judgement on me,\" he said.
Labour and Liberal Democrat negotiators are now set to hold formal negotiations over whether they could form an alliance.
It comes as the Conservative and Lib Dems held a further day of talks in an attempt to thrash out a power-sharing deal.
More follows...
-
i would laugh my nads off if a lib/lab pact becomes reality.Son of thatch (william squashy head hague) was boasting at 2pm how well things were going for the tory lib coalition. :cheer:
-
It's all kicking off.
Go to 4 mins 30 secs :laugh:
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gkHwU4DRA8[/video]
-
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
-
Quality! That Tory t**t was getting a bit mardy, I detect the tories have been rocked a bit by Browns statement and they are starting to panic a little bit that a deal has n't been done
-
(http://www.heady.co.uk/rm/brown_stalin.jpg)
Good riddance Mcstalin, you will not be missed.
-
Missed a chance here. Yesterday, I could have got 9/1 against Brown being PM on 1st June.
-
Filo wrote:
Quality! That Tory t**t was getting a bit mardy, I detect the tories have been rocked a bit by Browns statement and they are starting to panic a little bit that a deal has n't been done
The fact was Campell wouldnt accept on camera that lab were the big losers in the election. I'm impressed Boulton excercised that great ammount of personal control not to lamp that nulab lump of undemocratic slime.
Well done Boulton, your clearly thinking what the majority of this country are. My new fav broadcaster. fcuk the beeb, sky is where its at.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
-
Boomstick wrote:
Filo wrote:
Quality! That Tory t**t was getting a bit mardy, I detect the tories have been rocked a bit by Browns statement and they are starting to panic a little bit that a deal has n't been done
The fact was Campell wouldnt accept on camera that lab were the big losers in the election. I'm impressed Boulton excercised that great ammount of personal control not to lamp that nulab lump of undemocratic slime.
Well done Boulton, your clearly thinking what the majority of this country are. My new fav broadcaster. fcuk the beeb, sky is where its at.
Since when has 36 percent of the vote been the majority?Even the tory anti trade union laws require a two thirds majority in a ballot on industrial action. The torys have only just achieved just over one third of the vote in this election
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour f**ks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour f**ks the country again ..........................
-
Filo wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
Filo wrote:
Quality! That Tory t**t was getting a bit mardy, I detect the tories have been rocked a bit by Browns statement and they are starting to panic a little bit that a deal has n't been done
The fact was Campell wouldnt accept on camera that lab were the big losers in the election. I'm impressed Boulton excercised that great ammount of personal control not to lamp that nulab lump of undemocratic slime.
Well done Boulton, your clearly thinking what the majority of this country are. My new fav broadcaster. fcuk the beeb, sky is where its at.
Since when has 36 percent of the vote been the majority?
Cameron should say to Clegg, ok then we can have PR. There! I won! now fcuk off!
-
Boomstick wrote:
Cameron should say to Clegg, ok then we can have PR. There! I won! now fcuk off!
As BST pointed out, turkeys won't vote for Christmas.
-
Snods Shinpad wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
Cameron should say to Clegg, ok then we can have PR. There! I won! now fcuk off!
As BST pointed out, turkeys won't vote for Christmas.
I agree, but to say we would never see a tory government again is daft. Its a cycle, perhaps even an illusion of choice.
-
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour fcuks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour fcuks the country again ..........................
Kin 'ell spadger, you are truly mathematically challenged. The Tories got 36% of the vote. How on earth would they have won under PR.
Good fun though watching the Tories wriggling about like ants in boling water. Just seen some geeky get on BBC News babbying on saying Brown was responsible for the recession, the Hung Parliament, England not winning the World Cup for 44 years, the Crucifixion and Eve eating an apple. You could see him having to bite his lip to stop himself saying , \"it's just not fair. We should have won. Our turn! Our turn!\"
-
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour fcuks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour fcuks the country again ..........................
labour fcuks the economy please enlighten
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour fcuks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour fcuks the country again ..........................
Kin 'ell spadger, you are truly mathematically challenged. The Tories got 36% of the vote. How on earth would they have won under PR.
Good fun though watching the Tories wriggling about like ants in boling water. Just seen some geeky get on BBC News babbying on saying Brown was responsible for the recession, the Hung Parliament, England not winning the World Cup for 44 years, the Crucifixion and Eve eating an apple. You could see him having to bite his lip to stop himself saying , \"it's just not fair. We should have won. Our turn! Our turn!\"
Because the tories got the most votes, Cameron wins.
-
Boomstick wrote:
I agree, but to say we would never see a tory government again is daft. Its a cycle, perhaps even an illusion of choice.
Perfectly simple cock sparra. It's been more than 50 years since we've had a majority of people voting for right-leaning parties. In that time, at EVERY election, Labour, the Liberals and other left-leaning parties (SNP, SDLP, PC) have polled a majority if national votes.
Get used to it my crypto-fascist pal - if we get PR, we will NEVER have a right wing government again. At least not in our lifetimes.
-
Boomstick wrote:
Because the tories got the most votes, Cameron wins.
Cameron didn't get a majority of seats OR votes. His party is the largest, but given that he appears incapable of finding another 20 MPs to support him to get a majority speaks volumes.
His party didn't win. They were the least losing of the three losers.
Anyway, the long term game is up. Foetus-face Hague has just come out and said that they will offer PR if the Liberals will join them. So that's the Tories committing long-term political suicide.
-
charleydrfc wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour fcuks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour fcuks the country again ..........................
labour fcuks the economy please enlighten
took us into 2 illegal wars, that we are still fighting, turned our country in to one giant public sector, oversaw the beginning of benefits Britain, failed to control immigration and presided over the biggest boom and bust we may ever see. Not to mention allowing the trade unions to hold the country to ransom.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
[/quote] Anyway, the long term game is up. Foetus-face Hague has just come out and said that they will offer PR if the Liberals will join them. So that's the Tories committing long-term political suicide.[/quote]
And that just shows how effing desparate they scummy bas**rds are.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Anyway, the long term game is up. Foetus-face Hague has just come out and said that they will offer PR if the Liberals will join them. So that's the Tories committing long-term political suicide.[/quote]
And that just shows how effing desparate they scummy bas**rds are.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
I agree, but to say we would never see a tory government again is daft. Its a cycle, perhaps even an illusion of choice.
Perfectly simple cock sparra. It's been more than 50 years since we've had a majority of people voting for right-leaning parties. In that time, at EVERY election, Labour, the Liberals and other left-leaning parties (SNP, SDLP, PC) have polled a majority if national votes.
Get used to it my crypto-fascist pal - if we get PR, we will NEVER have a right wing government again. At least not in our lifetimes.
I strongly resent that remark , how dare you accuse me of being a crypto fascist? Infact I consider myself to have more Libertarian leanings. Its you that has admitted to having authoritarian leanings.
-
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
I agree, but to say we would never see a tory government again is daft. Its a cycle, perhaps even an illusion of choice.
Perfectly simple cock sparra. It's been more than 50 years since we've had a majority of people voting for right-leaning parties. In that time, at EVERY election, Labour, the Liberals and other left-leaning parties (SNP, SDLP, PC) have polled a majority if national votes.
Get used to it my crypto-fascist pal - if we get PR, we will NEVER have a right wing government again. At least not in our lifetimes.
I strongly resent that remark , how dare you accuse me of being a crypto fascist? Infact I consider myself to have more Libertarian leanings. Its you that has admitted to having authoritarian leanings.
Retracted Your Honour.
Personally, I describe my own beliefs as tending towards the acceptance of a good hard smack every once in a while to remind people that with liberty comes responsibilities. You call that Authoritarian. So do I in the odd humourous moment, but being serious, I consider it to be the height of enlightened pragmatism. You give opportunities, you support the weak, you limit the power of the powerful, and you expect effort and responsibility in return. A bit like being a parent really.
Now, I'm not saying that the Labour Party or ANY party is close to achieving that sort of state, but it seems to me to be one well worth aiming for.
-
Boomstick wrote:
took us into 2 illegal wars, that we are still fighting, turned our country in to one giant public sector, oversaw the beginning of benefits Britain, failed to control immigration and presided over the biggest boom and bust we may ever see. Not to mention allowing the trade unions to hold the country to ransom.
Phew. All that and the Bullingdon Club could STILL only get 36% of the vote. 4/10 Cameron and future-Baron Osbourne. Must try harder.
-
Gosh! What a thread.... Now I think I understand why cretins like Osbourne and Cameron actually won as many votes as they did. They prey upon the weak minded and the avariciously grasping already powerful. There's no other answer.
Simple answer is that the Tories screwed it up. Given the circumstances they should have won by a landslide. They didn't. So, by defintion, they're not very impressive. The Labour party, despite it's fascistic leanings towards command and control in the daily lives of us all, didn't do as badly as it would normally be expected they should have done. Ergo, by definition, they offer at least something that people respect. The Libs, tried hard. Worthy. Nice blokes. But ultimately peripheral.
Constitutionally, any combination that can command a majority is legitimate. The crux of any decision about that has almost nothing to do with today. It has everything to do with how it will leave the particpants looking at the next election. If the Tories do give PR to the LIbs, then they will have committed mass suicide. They are the only meaningful righ leaning party in the country. They have have lost every election since 1945 to the combination of left leaning parties - the Libs and the Labs. The Tories have only ever got in since 1945 because the left vote was split each time. I live in hope that Cameron and his cronies are so daft as to actually do it :):):) I shall immediately go out and dance on Maggies grave. Oh. hang on. She's not dead yet is she? Still, the shock of such rank stupidity will no doubt kill her off at long last.
Cheers
BobG
-
Snods Shinpad wrote:
It's all kicking off.
Go to 4 mins 30 secs :laugh:
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gkHwU4DRA8[/video]
Well bugger me. Only just got to a PC where I can open that. What with Bigot-gate and then this, Armando Iannucci should announce that The Thick of It is now going to be retired - reality has outdone fiction.
Was Adam Boulton pissed?
-
f**king hell one tory bloke on sky news reckons they've been betrayed by the lib dems, what goes round comes round, have they forgot about the tories betraying the mining industry in 84 and plunging whole comunitys into poverty
-
BobG wrote:
Constitutionally, any combination that can command a majority is legitimate.
Bang on Bob.
And THAT is why the Right are blubbling like kids who haven't been picked for the togger team. The Tories are still shellshocked that the election they had in their pocket slipped away. Then they thought Clegg had painted himself into a corner by tacitly supporting them. So, despite their protestations that thed only important thing was National Interest, what they apparently did was offer the Liberals a deal that they couldn't accept. They couldn't drop this idea that it was their RIGHT to form the Government. And now they get their second smack in the face as they suddenly realise that they are not the only deal in town.
IF Labour, the Liberals and one or two other parties can form a viable Parliamentary pact, THAT is the Government that we will end up with. And THAT will be deomcratically correct. If the Tories cannot find an additional 20 supporters to give them a majority, there is only one place to look for the blame.
-
Filo wrote:
fcuking hell one tory bloke on sky news reckons they've been betrayed by the lib dems, what goes round comes round, have they forgot about the tories betraying the mining industry in 84 and plunging whole comunitys into poverty
I think some of them will be going back to Matron for bitty tonight.
-
ha ha that video above is quality!! What's happening with the Sky News presenters, they all not slept since the election or something, over-tired? First Kay Burley bullying the bloke who wanted PR and now this. Makes for good tv though, never known such an entertaining election :)
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Well bugger me. Only just got to a PC where I can open that. What with Bigot-gate and then this, Armando Iannucci should announce that The Thick of It is now going to be retired - reality has outdone fiction.
Was Adam Boulton pissed?
They have previous...
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85RXPnXDkrc[/video]
Go to 1 min 56 secs.
I think if there is a Part Three we can expect blows to be traded.
-
Filo wrote:
have they forgot about the tories betraying the mining industry in 84 and plunging whole comunitys into poverty
Considering some of the Tories would have been barely out of nappies in '84 how would they remember it??
Is it not time to stop banging on about events that happened 26 years ago?? And yes, the majority of my family were miners from a mining community.
-
Snods Shinpad wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Well bugger me. Only just got to a PC where I can open that. What with Bigot-gate and then this, Armando Iannucci should announce that The Thick of It is now going to be retired - reality has outdone fiction.
Was Adam Boulton pissed?
They have previous...
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85RXPnXDkrc[/video]
Go to 1 min 56 secs.
I think if there is a Part Three we can expect blows to be traded.
Brilliant. That's how politics should be. A few more people getting passionate about things.
Campbell is an easy target for people to complain about. But he has been essential to Labour ever having a fair chance in the media. He is a media insider and he knows how to squeeze journalists' balls when he had to. I suspect that he also knew about a few skeletons in a few cupboards when he had to play real hard-ball.
For me, the important thing is not the means, it's the end - it's what he really believes in. He convinced me when I heard him on a radio programme spitting bile at a Daily Mail journalist after a story that the journalist had written.
Campbell's old friend was Robert Millar, the cyclist who won King of the Mountains in the Tour de France in the 80s. After he finished cycling, he had a nervous breakdown, went into hiding and reportedly became a trans-sexual. The Daily Mail hounded him, writing a series of nasty, vindictive articles about him. Basically, they didn't give a f**k about the bloke/woman, so long as they got their story. Campbell told this journalist, in so many words, that he wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire, and that Millar was 10 times the man that the journalist was.
I can handle nasty bas**rds, as long as they are on the right side. It's the nasty bas**rds who bully the weak and vulnerable who deserve contempt - and to have Alastair Campbell unleashed on them.
-
Thinwhiteduke wrote:
Filo wrote:
have they forgot about the tories betraying the mining industry in 84 and plunging whole comunitys into poverty
Considering some of the Tories would have been barely out of nappies in '84 how would they remember it??
Is it not time to stop banging on about events that happened 26 years ago?? And yes, the majority of my family were miners from a mining community.
As I've said a dozen times, it's about political philosophy, NOT about individuals. When Osbourne and Cameron cry for public sector cuts now, as we are crawling out of recession, they show that they are cut from EXACTLY the same cloth as Maggie. it would be, once again, the weakest sections of the nation that would bear the brunt of their economic policies. Just like it was under Maggie.
-
Alistair Campbell! Is'nt that the Yorkshire man who supports Burnley!
Crazy bas**rd
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Snods Shinpad wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
Well bugger me. Only just got to a PC where I can open that. What with Bigot-gate and then this, Armando Iannucci should announce that The Thick of It is now going to be retired - reality has outdone fiction.
Was Adam Boulton pissed?
They have previous...
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85RXPnXDkrc[/video]
Go to 1 min 56 secs.
I think if there is a Part Three we can expect blows to be traded.
Brilliant. That's how politics should be. A few more people getting passionate about things.
Campbell is an easy target for people to complain about. But he has been essential to Labour ever having a fair chance in the media. He is a media insider and he knows how to squeeze journalists' balls when he had to. I suspect that he also knew about a few skeletons in a few cupboards when he had to play real hard-ball.
For me, the important thing is not the means, it's the end - it's what he really believes in. He convinced me when I heard him on a radio programme spitting bile at a Daily Mail journalist after a story that the journalist had written.
Campbell's old friend was Robert Millar, the cyclist who won King of the Mountains in the Tour de France in the 80s. After he finished cycling, he had a nervous breakdown, went into hiding and reportedly became a trans-sexual. The Daily Mail hounded him, writing a series of nasty, vindictive articles about him. Basically, they didn't give a fcuk about the bloke/woman, so long as they got their story. Campbell told this journalist, in so many words, that he wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire, and that Millar was 10 times the man that the journalist was.
I can handle nasty bas**rds, as long as they are on the right side. It's the nasty bas**rds who bully the weak and vulnerable who deserve contempt - and to have Alastair Campbell unleashed on them.
This thread has been interesting in a slightly o/t way for me because it's the first time I've seen Alastair Campbell in action. I've been reading his book,'The Blair Diaries' forever because it's very long and also because it gets hard to read as he uses everyone's initials throughout the book rather than writing out their names. So far I've memorized *TB, CB, GB, SB, and AC, oh, and occasionally NK. For all the other less prominent players, I have to go back to the front to see who he talking about, which is difficult as I only pick it up every six months or so when I have nothing else to read! Note to AC: lose the initials.... ;)
Anyway, it was interesting to see AC in action. He is very good at his job isn't he with his honey-tongued words and voice, and he keeps his cool very well. And I agree that GB has gotten the short end of the stick r/t press coverage. Yay AC!
* See what I mean! :)
-
DadsleyRover wrote:
Alistair Campbell! Is'nt that the Yorkshire man who supports Burnley!
Crazy bas**rd
Maybe he's got family roots in Burnley?
-
Boomstick wrote:
charleydrfc wrote:
Boomstick wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Haha about time someone told Campbell where to go. Feel a bit for Gordon Brown, removing him is not the answer for Labour, I didn't vote Labour but that wasn't because of Brown, Clegg or Cameron, it was down to policy. Changing Brown doesn't change policy, if it does then surely a Lib/Lab coalition would lead to a new election? We all know that wouldn't happen, I fail to see what more than a gimmick, him resigning really is.
Course it's not a gimmick. Labour and the Liberals are very close on many policies - much closer than either of them are to the Tories. The main sticking point was Brown. Now he's gone there's a clear path to a deal.
Cameron, Osbourne and the rest of the Old Etonians must be shitting bricks. If Labour and the Liberals bring in PR, none of us will live to see another Tory government.
But yet if we had PR a week ago then the Tories would have won.
Labour fcuks the economy, people get pissed off and vote tory.
> The Tories get elected and instigate painful and deeply unpopular (BUT NECESSARY) policies to sort the mess created by Labour, people get pissed off and vote Labour. > Labour fcuks the country again ..........................
labour fcuks the economy please enlighten
took us into 2 illegal wars, that we are still fighting, turned our country in to one giant public sector, oversaw the beginning of benefits Britain, failed to control immigration and presided over the biggest boom and bust we may ever see. Not to mention allowing the trade unions to hold the country to ransom.
Tell me how the trade unions are holding the country to ransom? The removal of labour is the only thing a working man has in his armoury these days. And that's getting harder with employers running like babbys to the high court every time a ballot goes the wrong way.
And if that is what you think then you had better get ready when the cuts come because I honestly believe we could be in for strikes like not seen since the 70s or early 80s. Maybe even a national strike if Cameron gets in.
-
It looks like Labour have thrown the towel in and Clegg has fallen for the tory spin after they threw the dummy out last night. All who voted Conservative and were worried about your job, be very worried now, the days of high unemployment last seen under Thatchers Government are about to return!
-
As a Labour voter I see this as nothing other than a good thing: a case of short term pain for long term gain.
The Tories are going to have to introduce a period of austerity the like of which a generation of voters have never experienced before. Greece is an extreme example, but the reaction to the introduction of huge cuts there shows how people tend to feel about such things. Given the instability of coalitions the LibCon arrangement should last no longer than 2 years, by which time the Tories will be loathed once more and a vast number of Lib Dem voters who found themselves unwittingly dragged into an arrangement with the Tories should have seen the light.
Step up Prime Minister Milliband - of the David variety.
-
Filo wrote:
It looks like Labour have thrown the towel in and Clegg has fallen for the tory spin after they threw the dummy out last night. All who voted Conservative and were worried about your job, be very worried now, the days of high unemployment last seen under Thatchers Government are about to return!
Well none of my course mates seem to be able to find jobs under the current Labour government, so in that perspective it can't really get much worse for us.
Let's see what the big bad Tories do for the country over the next few years. If they've not changed from the evil party they're made out to be on here, we'll soon find out.
-
Filo wrote:
It looks like Labour have thrown the towel in and Clegg has fallen for the tory spin after they threw the dummy out last night. All who voted Conservative and were worried about your job, be very worried now, the days of high unemployment last seen under Thatchers Government are about to return!
Nahh! Clegg has gone with what he initially stated and backed the Party who gained the most votes.
As for the Jobs situation, I wasnt worried for my job before...and I wont worry for my job with a Tory Government either...I'll be doing it until I choose to leave, or commit gross misconduct and Im sacked.
-
Thinwhiteduke wrote:
As for the Jobs situation, I wasnt worried for my job before...and I wont worry for my job with a Tory Government either...I'll be doing it until I choose to leave, or commit gross misconduct and Im sacked.
Lucky you! not everyone has a secure job, you basically are saying f**k you i`m alright, typical tory attitude!
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Well none of my course mates seem to be able to find jobs under the current Labour government, so in that perspective it can't really get much worse for us.
Let's see what the big bad Tories do for the country over the next few years. If they've not changed from the evil party they're made out to be on here, we'll soon find out.
Agree with all of that.
Time we tell whether the electorate have made the right choice - certainly Labour have been no great shakes, especially in the last 3 years, and the arrogance in their belief they still have the right to govern in light of recent developments speaks volumes.
Having said that, the Torys could screw us over....but whats to say Labour wouldnt have done the same?
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Let's see what the big bad Tories do for the country over the next few years.
Change that to the next few months, I can`t see a coalition lasting much longer than 12 months, the lib dems will eventually realise that the Tory`s have fed them bullshit
-
Filo wrote:
Thinwhiteduke wrote:
As for the Jobs situation, I wasnt worried for my job before...and I wont worry for my job with a Tory Government either...I'll be doing it until I choose to leave, or commit gross misconduct and Im sacked.
Lucky you! not everyone has a secure job, you basically are saying fcuk you i`m alright, typical tory attitude!
No it aint a secure job...no more than any other. But Ive trained to the hilt to get to be the best in my company where I work.
Our lass works for the Council, hardly that secure, but she's voted conservative also. She might lose her job, if she does she'll find another, cos one things for sure, the Job Centres are very rarely without vacancies.
I like how you are so cocksure of how the Tories will govern based on events from quarter of a century ago. Leaders change, people change, situations change. After all, who'd have thought, 25-30 years ago, that Labour wouldnt give two fcuks about the working class in 2010 eh?
-
Thinwhiteduke wrote:
Filo wrote:
Thinwhiteduke wrote:
As for the Jobs situation, I wasnt worried for my job before...and I wont worry for my job with a Tory Government either...I'll be doing it until I choose to leave, or commit gross misconduct and Im sacked.
Lucky you! not everyone has a secure job, you basically are saying fcuk you i`m alright, typical tory attitude!
No it aint a secure job...no more than any other. But Ive trained to the hilt to get to be the best in my company where I work.
Our lass works for the Council, hardly that secure, but she's voted conservative also. She might lose her job, if she does she'll find another, cos one things for sure, the Job Centres are very rarely without vacancies.
I like how you are so cocksure of how the Tories will govern based on events from quarter of a century ago. Leaders change, people change, situations change. After all, who'd have thought, 25-30 years ago, that Labour wouldnt give two fcuks about the working class in 2010 eh?
You want to hope you or your lass don`t lose your job with that arrogant attitude, yes there are jobs out there if you want to work for £5.80 hour, I presume with the high level of skill you possess that your salary reflects that, i`ve gone from £13 hour to £5.80 since September last year, there are no jobs with half decent pay believe me
-
I wonder how many Lib Dem voters are now thinking their vote was wasted, like another poster said, this may turn out to be good for Labour if the Tory`s don`t get it right with their drastic economic action
-
I have to say Filo, all the best people are on £5.80 an hour................Well two of them anyway..Me and Thee...:)
-
Your wage has gone down in the last year, but it's all the fault of the Tories.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Your wage has gone down in the last year, but it's all the fault of the Tories.
dont forget the ref. Bloody useless
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Your wage has gone down in the last year, but it's all the fault of the Tories.
I never said it was the fault of the Tory`s, I was pointing out to the arrogant highly skilled person that thinks he can just walk into another job and the fact that there are jobs out there all be it low paid and i`m sure with him being the high flyer he says he is within his company he`ll be well paid.
I sincerely hope that I`m wrong about the prospect of higher unemployment, but sadly I fear I`m right with the emergency budget the Tory`s are proposing. I would n`t wish unemployment on anyone
-
Once again around here Henry Bellingham retained his seat comfortably. As I have said before , for a politician , he is a good man.
Mind you, depending on how you see it the either noble or deranged labour candidate totally pi**ed on his own chips.
Lib Dems came second..
for me, it was always obvious Henry would still be our M.P, so in that he will always do the best he can for his constituants be it in government or oposition, I voted therefore for the third choice..I couid not bring myself to vote tory, as a very lowly creature in the financial scheme of things, I just don't trust them..
they seem to despise everything I am, a single parent, albeit of now adult children, on a very low wage. No live in partner, no cosy two point four exixtance.
Tbh, they rather frighten me for my future.
-
Just in case anyone is feeling sorry for Gord yesterday he gave £10billion of your money to bail out Greece. In return he gets to be the next chair of the IMF on £330,oooo pa tax free. In case anyone is wondering thats enough for 1,000 Billy Sharps. Not pretending the tories are any better but the left should drop the holy than thou bit.
-
Actually I think its 10,000 Billy Sharps :side:
-
Filo wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Your wage has gone down in the last year, but it's all the fault of the Tories.
I never said it was the fault of the Tory`s, I was pointing out to the arrogant highly skilled person that thinks he can just walk into another job and the fact that there are jobs out there all be it low paid and i`m sure with him being the high flyer he says he is within his company he`ll be well paid.
I sincerely hope that I`m wrong about the prospect of higher unemployment, but sadly I fear I`m right with the emergency budget the Tory`s are proposing. I would n`t wish unemployment on anyone
I understand your point. I'm finding it impossible to find work. Certainly finishing uni at a bad time. However, what is for sure is that cuts are inevitable. Had it been Labour, Tory, Green party whatever, cuts just had to come. The finances of government are a mess.
We had a lecture from a guy who works for the NAO and had been involved in the audit of government. The national accounts were to be released over a year ago, but with impending election etc their release was blocked. He expected the document to be released after the election. Let's see if it is, but his words were; \"were the country a business then liquidation would be inevitable\". That spoke volumes to me.
-
jucyberry wrote:
Once again around here Henry Bellingham retained his seat comfortably. As I have said before , for a politician , he is a good man.
Mind you, depending on how you see it the either noble or deranged labour candidate totally pi**ed on his own chips.
Lib Dems came second..
for me, it was always obvious Henry would still be our M.P, so in that he will always do the best he can for his constituants be it in government or oposition, I voted therefore for the third choice..I couid not bring myself to vote tory, as a very lowly creature in the financial scheme of things, I just don't trust them..
they seem to despise everything I am, a single parent, albeit of now adult children, on a very low wage. No live in partner, no cosy two point four exixtance.
Tbh, they rather frighten me for my future.
Be very afraid Jucy, one thing for sure is that the tory government will get rid of working tax credits, which keep so many single parents/low paid workers afloat. The £5.80 rate then becomes unlivable and there will be no safety net so nothing will be there. Phase 5 is now being looked at by government. these are the folks that have been unemployed for more than 2 years, apparently the major feature of it is to make people work for any benefits recieved, where will they find all those jobs? Kiss goodbye to the £5.80 jobs when companies are encouraged to take on the unemployed with tax breaks and with the promise of free labour! It should be an interesting 12 months or so.
-
bas**rd.
Oh well - I suppose none of us could really be surprised, especially given that most of us probably also thought Bullingdon Boy would be in No.10 already.
Buckle up for a long and painful ride everyone. The only positive to reflect upon at the moment is that we shouldn't have to wait too long to see Labour return.
-
I thought the Tory manifesto set out that only families with income of over 50k would stop getting tax credits which is fair enough.
-
Wait and see, 60 billion of cuts in one year has to come from somewhere, and that means a drastic reduction in public spending. he last time it was tried Thatcher had a LOT of oil money which propped it all up, but when the next Tory cuts come and unemployment goes through the roof there is not an infinite pot of money for the welfare state to do it this time. People will go hungry, and real poverty will return to this country for the first time since the 1930's.
-
Doom and gloom. It won't happen.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
Be very afraid Jucy, one thing for sure is that the tory government will get rid of working tax credits, which keep so many single parents/low paid workers afloat. The £5.80 rate then becomes unlivable and there will be no safety net so nothing will be there. Phase 5 is now being looked at by government. these are the folks that have been unemployed for more than 2 years, apparently the major feature of it is to make people work for any benefits recieved, where will they find all those jobs? Kiss goodbye to the £5.80 jobs when companies are encouraged to take on the unemployed with tax breaks and with the promise of free labour! It should be an interesting 12 months or so.[/quote]
Well thats me dead then, cos there is no way on gods earth I can afford the eight different tablets I have to take everyday just to keep me going. I only get just over £12 a week tax credits, but the pescription part is invaluable.
I'd say its been a grand life, but to be totally honest it has been a bag of shit life with a few nice bits now and again...:(
Key word is FAMILIES mr Frost.
-
jucyberry wrote:
Well thats me dead then, cos there is no way on gods earth I can afford the eight different tablets I have to take everyday just to keep me going. I only get just over £12 a week tax credits, but the pescription part is invaluable.
I'd say its been a grand life, but to be totally honest it has been a bag of shit life with a few nice bits now and again...:(
Key word is FAMILIES mr Frost.[/quote]
Can you not get a prepayment prescription if needs be pay an annual price, that's what I have to get.
-
Just seen a status update on Facebook that sums up the new coalition - Con-Dems!
:unsure:
-
Here here Rigo. Unfortunately some people would rather the country rot with a Labour government giving hand outs to all and sundry than give Cameron a chance.
-
At the end of the day, they are all a bunch of cock sucking toffee nosed t**ts who can't lay straight in bed. They live in a different world to us and do not fully understand how the normal man in the street lives, and i very much doubt if they give a f**k. Who ever is in charge, he will f**k us over.
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
Lets remember, it wasn't them that got us into this financial mess in the first place. It was a spineless Labour regime that gave so many promises back in 1997 and delivered so many lies.
I thought it was the global recession?
Today's news, IMO, is probably the best thing to happen for this country in a very long time.
What about the shortest NHS waiting lists in history, record number of police, record number of new schools, SureStart, tax credits?
Therefore, lets give Cameron a fair crack of the whip as opposed to being serial moaners and damning him before he has even finished looking around No.10.
Explain how we are serial moaners Rigo?
I'm not sure if it's naivety or blind hope, but you seem to be very unaware of what a Tory government (sorry, Tory led coalition) means to the working classes?
MrFrost wrote:
Unfortunately some people would rather the country rot with a Labour government giving hand outs to all and sundry than give Cameron a chance.
From the Labour Manifesto: \"No young person in Britain should be long-term unemployed: those out of work for six months or more will be guaranteed employment or training through the £1 billion Future Jobs Fund, with mandatory participation after ten months...All those who are long-term unemployed
for two years will be guaranteed a job placement, which they will be required to take up or have
their benefits cut.\"
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
I suspect half of people's gripe with the Tories is still down to feeling angst and hatred towards Maggie Thatcher. Now I wasn't around when she was in power, but surely to god some people should move on. She may have been a bitch and that's really a matter of opinion as no doubt some people would say she was wonderful. However, just because she came under the Tory banner doesn't constitute a reason for people to hate everyone under that same Tory banner, 25 years later.
Good luck to David Cameron.
\"Lady Thatcher is the greatest Tory hero of all time, according to a straw poll of party activists and MPs.\"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7643110.stm
It seems current Tory MP's love her mate, what does that tell you???
-
And where are these guaranteed job placements going to be? It's all irrelevant anyway. Labour aren't in power. Accept it.
-
I was simply replying to comments you had both previously made. No need to get childish.
I truly hope the Con-Dems can work together for a better Britain; it'll be interesting to see how they achieve it. :blink:
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
Lets remember, it wasn't them that got us into this financial mess in the first place. It was a spineless Labour regime that gave so many promises back in 1997 and delivered so many lies. [/quote]
Oh for GOODNESS SAKE Rigo!
Have you not got TV up in Yorkshire yet? Don't they have schools up there?
The 'mess' was caused, in order, by:
1) right wing dogma in the 1980's that insisted state controls over almost anything were a hindrance rather than a help.
2) The creation therefore of a culture where risks, greed and selfishness took a firm hold without any sanction from any government
3) The failure of the Labour Party to reverse that trend (which may be understandable as to do so would have made them unelectable for years and years and years)
4) Maniac US bankers risking the entire capital, and more, of their banks in the pursuit of a greedy fast buck (evidence: remind yourself which vast US bank was charged with corruption only 10 days ago and what that corruption was all about)
5) The collapse of many US banks - left to fail by a right wing and useless US government
6) The spread, through the administrators of those collapsed banks calling in their loans, to the rest of the world
7) Greedy UK banks also about to collapse since they too had risked more than the capital they had
8) The Labour Government deciding that no banks = no money for anyone = no jobs = no society and so throwing money, £200BN of it (which tells just how big a mess the fcuking bankers made of their jobs) at the problem to ensure that you, and me, could still draw money out of the bank and have a job.
Did you know that this country was within 30 minutes of there being as near as damn it no banks at all? The programmes to shut down the cash machines were ready. The banks doors were closing - for the last time. It was bloody Labour who prevented that you idiot!
And what did the grease ball Tories recommend we do? Sit on our fcuking hands. That's what! We would all be dead of starvation by now if they'd been in power. And that is not hyperbole. It wasn't just the UK that Brown & Co decided for. It was the US, and much of the rest of the world too. They all followed his lead. If the US banks had really gone under, there would be millions alive today who would now be dead. Aid? Forget it. Health service? Forget it. Benefits? You must be bloody joking!
Grow up Rigo. Look at what is around you. Learn to use your brain. I know you've got a good one. For goodness sake look critically at the shite in the press and on tv.
Although I don't like Brown personally, and I despise his database & surveillance society, the bloke is still a saint. Without him we would be worse off now than during the 1930's. Anyone ever tell you of the Jarrow Marches?
Cheers
BobG
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
However, just because she came under the Tory banner doesn't constitute a reason for people to hate everyone under that same Tory banner, 25 years later.
Good luck to David Cameron.
Same party, same philosophies, same principles, say no more!
-
MrFrost wrote:
Here here Rigo. Unfortunately some people would rather the country rot with a Labour government giving hand outs to all and sundry than give Cameron a chance.
If you think the country has been rotting under a Labour government just wait & see what this shower of shite do. Watch the increase in unemployment & privatisation of everything that hasn't yet being privatised. I'm still gobsmacked that the Lib-Dems have opted to support the Tories.I'm also really pissed off that Labour were unable to convince the Lib-Dems to support them.
-
Some brilliant conspiracy theories there.
BobG wrote:
Rigoglioso wrote:
Lets remember, it wasn't them that got us into this financial mess in the first place. It was a spineless Labour regime that gave so many promises back in 1997 and delivered so many lies.
Oh for GOODNESS SAKE Rigo!
Have you not got TV up in Yorkshire yet? Don't they have schools up there?
The 'mess' was caused, in order, by:
1) right wing dogma in the 1980's that insisted state controls over almost anything were a hindrance rather than a help.
2) The creation therefore of a culture where risks, greed and selfishness took a firm hold without any sanction from any government
3) The failure of the Labour Party to reverse that trend (which may be understandable as to do so would have made them unelectable for years and years and years)
4) Maniac US bankers risking the entire capital, and more, of their banks in the pursuit of a greedy fast buck (evidence: remind yourself which vast US bank was charged with corruption only 10 days ago and what that corruption was all about)
5) The collapse of many US banks - left to fail by a right wing and useless US government
6) The spread, through the administrators of those collapsed banks calling in their loans, to the rest of the world
7) Greedy UK banks also about to collapse since they too had risked more than the capital they had
8) The Labour Government deciding that no banks = no money for anyone = no jobs = no society and so throwing money, £200BN of it (which tells just how big a mess the fcuking bankers made of their jobs) at the problem to ensure that you, and me, could still draw money out of the bank and have a job.
Did you know that this country was within 30 minutes of there being as near as damn it no banks at all? The programmes to shut down the cash machines were ready. The banks doors were closing - for the last time. It was bloody Labour who prevented that you idiot!
And what did the grease ball Tories recommend we do? Sit on our fcuking hands. That's what! We would all be dead of starvation by now if they'd been in power. And that is not hyperbole. It wasn't just the UK that Brown & Co decided for. It was the US, and much of the rest of the world too. They all followed his lead. If the US banks had really gone under, there would be millions alive today who would now be dead. Aid? Forget it. Health service? Forget it. Benefits? You must be bloody joking!
Grow up Rigo. Look at what is around you. Learn to use your brain. I know you've got a good one. For goodness sake look critically at the shite in the press and on tv.
Although I don't like Brown personally, and I despise his database & surveillance society, the bloke is still a saint. Without him we would be worse off now than during the 1930's. Anyone ever tell you of the Jarrow Marches?
Cheers
BobG[/quote]
-
Rigo, people like you my firend represent all that is wrong with the result of this Election and the young people in society that didn't see Thatchers public raping of the country. GB may have made boo boo's in the last 3 years but the man should go down as a miracle worker in history. Saving this country and helping many others by his quick thinking to the Global economy crisis. The man is a genius when it comes to the economy. He was however a victim of bad run of events some he could control and some he couldn't.
He may not have been the most popular, but I guarantee that you and your family will have benefitted more under him and Labour in the last 13 years than under Thatchers love children reign.
Lets just hope that this black cloud is not over the nation for long!
-
This is what we have to look forward to......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKFTtYx2OHc&feature=player_embedded#!
-
bobjimwilly wrote:
I was simply replying to comments you had both previously made. No need to get childish.
I truly hope the Con-Dems can work together for a better Britain; it'll be interesting to see how they achieve it. :blink:
A Tory trait, only last night they were blubbering and calling the Lib Dems because they thought that they had lost a deal, low and behold a day later they`re all shagging each other again!
-
I understand, now, how Josef Goebbels managed it for so long. All it needs is folk unable to think and folk unable to see what is in front of their eyes. Step forwards Mr Frost! You could, at least, try to formulate a reasoned argument in support of the indefensible. But no. As usual you resort to fatuous one liners designed to sneer. You contribute nothing to any debate that requires even a smattering of intelligence.
Cheers
BobG
-
I was brought up with a Tory Government. I never went without. I just have to laugh at the suggestion we are all going to die of starvation and that we were within minutes of having the banks close their doors for good. It's nonsense.
The labour government have made it far too easy for the work shy, border jumpers, and the general piss takers. Did you know the job centre will dish out 150 nicker for a new suit if you don't have one. I'm sorry but that's not what I pay my taxes for.
-
Nick Clegg deputy PM, a man who`s party lost seats at the general election becomes Deputy PM, is that morally correct? After all thats the argument Cameron and Clegg were using against Brown! They`re already being two faced!
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
Thanks.
I find it amazing that me, and people like me, represent all that is wrong with this country! If only I'd studied politics and joined the Labour party that may be true!
At the end of the day, the results of the elections showed that the people of this country no longer wanted Labour to lead our government. The Tories didn't win the election outright, but they performed a damn sight better than Labour and that speaks volumes - yet so many people on here claim that a losing Labour government and Gordon Brown have been so good for us?
If people want to worry themselves with conspiracy theories or the fear of the unknown or panic frantically because we have a Tory government, then that is entirely their choice. However, just remember that Labour (who are supposedly so good for the working man and have done so brilliant) have been unanimously lost this election.
You are not representative of what is wrong in this country Rigo, but you are one of a generation that has been taught not to take ANY notice of politics or history or anything that might actually challenge you intellectually. That is why we seem to consider voting as some sort of Xfactor game show instead of being about principles and policy,because to do that would be too boring. When Bob points out the roots of the economic crisis that affected the last government so badly you ignore it. Those free market economics began in Thatchers time, and were never controlled by the travesty that was \"New Labour\". What is to come might actually wake a few folks up and then they will start to look at what are the causes of the problems that we have. You have grown up coveted by this government that has funded education and your development so much more than in the 80's when I was teaching \"yoghurt pot science\" we used them because we were not given enough money to buy glassware for a science department, and leaks were covered by endless number of buckets coming out instead of fixing the roof. that is the reality of the sort of cuts we are talking about. Some facts are on this video, it is about Wales, but it could have been applied to any other region other than the South East, who were protected because they voted the right way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wXGbunGqsk&feature=related
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
Cameron hasn't even been PM yet for any more than a couple of hours and already people are moaning about what MIGHT happen and how bad they have been in the past!! Yes, the past (i.e. done with, it's happened and it can't be changed or undone).
Why some people are getting in such a hissy fit is ridiculous. Fear of the unknown? Fear of an uncomfortable ride with the Tories? At least let Cameron serve some of his time as PM, before passing judgement on his party and how good they have been for this country.
Or are some people just bitter because they are staunch Labour supporters and they haven't had their own way at the elections, with Labour coming out on top?
Rigo.
Permit me as somebody who has been around the block a couple of times to give you a word of experience. You are being terribly naive. And patronising too. Some of us make our decisions based on facts, not prejudices.
Cameron's entire approach has been to put himself forward as a new face of compassionate Toryism. I don't know. He may even believe it. But I judge a politician on what their POLICIES will lead to, not what platitudes they spout.
Look at Cameron's economics.
When the banking crisis exploded back in 2008, he got EVERY SINGLE call wrong.
1) He wanted Government to keep out and leave it to the markets to deal with Northern Rock. WRONG. That is PRECISELY what Bush's administration did with Lehman Brothers, and that monumental, calamitous mistake is what turned a problem into the greatest financial disaster in 80 years.
2) After the Lehman's meltdown, the world was staring utter catastrophe in the face. It's easy to forget that now, but we were 24 hours away from the entire world banking system collapsing. That would have thrown us into an economic disaster that none of us could even dream of. And that is no exaggeration - it's what every respected economist says. Cameron and Osbourne had absolutely NOTHING to say at all. they had not the faintest idea what to do. Neither did Bush. Most terrifyingly of all, neither did Bush's Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, who was on the verge of a nervous breakdown. GORDON BROWN showed the way out of it. I guarantee you that in 100 years time, he will be lauded as the man who saved the world from financial and economic catastrophe. And don't just take my word for it. Look at what the American Noble Prize winning economsit Paul Krugman (scarcely a Socialist!) said at the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/opinion/13krugman.html
Please spend a moment reading that. It's illuminating.
3) In the recession that inevitably followed the banking crisis, Cameron and Osbourne have repeatedly called for Government spending to be reigned in. THIS is the crux of it. THIS is what shows you what their true political philosophy is. The one tool that Government has to mitigate the worst effects of a recession is to keep the public sector strong as the private sector struggles. It's called \"Keynsian counter-cyclical investment\". It's based on the theory that if you slash Government spending at the same time as the Private Sector is struggling, you will prolong and deepen the recession. It's an economic strategy that was developed to make sure that the appalling poverty and inequality of the 1930s never returned. It's what responsible governments do if they want to protect their nation from the worst ravages of the market. Thatcher was pathologically opposed to that strategy and refused to implement it to the extent that most Governments would have done - that's why the recessions of 1980 and 1990 were so vicious, especially round here. Cameron and Osbourne would have done precisely the same thing. THAT shows that behind the smiles and the \"Call me Dave\" front, they are cut from the same cloth.
Fortunately, we're probably through the worst for the private sector, which is now strating to grow again. The Tories' \"efficiency savings\" (which actually means \"job cuts\") will still hurt, but with luck they won't tip us back into recession.
You're still young. You'll have your own experience of life under a Tory Government over the next few years. And a desperately inexperienced Tory Government at that, when we're still in desperately dangerous economic waters. Good Luck.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
3) In the recession that inevitably followed the banking crisis, Cameron and Osbourne have repeatedly called for Government spending to be reigned in. THIS is the crux of it. THIS is what shows you what their true political philosophy is. The one tool that Government has to mitigate the worst effects of a recession is to keep the public sector strong as the private sector struggles. It's called \"Keynsian counter-cyclical investment\". It's based on the theory that if you slash Government spending at the same time as the Private Sector is struggling, you will prolong and deepen the recession. It's an economic strategy that was developed to make sure that the appalling poverty and inequality of the 1930s never returned. It's what responsible governments do if they want to protect their nation from the worst ravages of the market. Thatcher was pathologically opposed to that strategy and refused to implement it to the extent that most Governments would have done - that's why the recessions of 1980 and 1990 were so vicious, especially round here. Cameron and Osbourne would have done precisely the same thing. THAT shows that behind the smiles and the \"Call me Dave\" front, they are cut from the same cloth.
Fortunately, we're probably through the worst for the private sector, which is now strating to grow again. The Tories' \"efficiency savings\" (which actually means \"job cuts\") will still hurt, but with luck they won't tip us back into recession.
You're still young. You'll have your own experience of life under a Tory Government over the next few years. And a desperately inexperienced Tory Government at that, when we're still in desperately dangerous economic waters. Good Luck.
What's the alternative then? Everyone seems to use cuts as a majorly bad thing. They're not good, but equally they can't be avoided. Accept it and deal with it. What exactly do we propose as an alternative to dealing with our ridiculous levels of debt in public monies?
-
MrFrost wrote:
I was brought up with a Tory Government. I never went without.
Lucky you. I had mates who didn't work for the thick end of a decade. Still, everyone for themselves eh?
I just have to laugh at the suggestion ... that we were within minutes of having the banks close their doors for good. It's nonsense.
As I said in the other post, easy to scoff now and say it was nothing. But the people in the know, those who had to make the decisions were shitting bricks at the time. None of them had EVER known a situation like it. Without Government intervention on a massive scale, some banks WOULD have collapsed. Some people WOULD have lost everything. No question.
But that wasn't half the problem. The far, far, far bigger problem was that the banks themselves had lost confidence in the system. They had become terrified to lend money to each other, in case someone else went the way of Lehamn Brothers and the whole thing collapsed. The banks had become the equivalent of the old lass keeping her life savings under the bed. And if that had not been sorted out, the result would have been that the supply of credit that the entire Western economy depends upon would have dried up. In simple terms, the Western economy would have collapsed. Viable businesses would have gone kaput by the thousand, because they woyuld not have been able to get credit to see them over a cashflow problem. MILLIONS, many millions would have been put out of work. No exaggeration. We WERE that close.
And it WOULD have happened if Brown had not shown the way out of it. The American's didn't have the first idea what to do. No-one in Europe knew what to do. After Brown announced our bank bail out plan, the rest of the world (Governments of all political colours) rushed to do the same thing within days.
The reason that we have (only) had a bad recession, not a decade-long Mother of All Depressions is because we were lucky enough to have Brown in position.
You lot can sleep easy in your beds and say, \"It wasn't that big a deal.\" You were lucky enough to have the man you needed to steer us through it, when (according to comments on here) you didn't even have an inkling of how dangerous the situation was. God help us if Osbourne had been at the helm.
-
Think back not years ago but just recently. How did we end up with such a large debt? Governments bailed out the WHOLE banking system to stop it collapsing, if that had happened then forget any football or anything else we would have been in absolute chaos. This money was GIVEN to the banks so they would not lose all your money in dubious deals they had invented to try to make quick money for those involved in high finance. So who has to pay the money back? Why you and me of course!! That seems fair doesn't it? So who do you think should be paying the money back in shedloads? Surely not the banks? It will not be broached by the new government because their main backer is somebody who lives abroad and makes money from..... high finance! That is what you wanted, and now you will pay the price for a generation.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
What's the alternative then? Everyone seems to use cuts as a majorly bad thing. They're not good, but equally they can't be avoided. Accept it and deal with it. What exactly do we propose as an alternative to dealing with our ridiculous levels of debt in public monies?
It's about TIMING. Both Labour and the Liberals wanted to delay public sector cuts until the private sector recovery was well established. The Tories, for ideological reasons, want to impose them immediately, and if this tips us back into recession, then so be it.
It's a fundamental difference in outlook. Do you protect people from the worst of a recession, and pay the debt later, or do you tighten your purse strings now and tough shit on the weakest who bear the price?
The Liberals have shown how strong THEIR principles are on this, because they've caved in immediately.
-
There is a lot of patronising opinions on hear from people who really should know better. If it was as simple as they say then why are they not in power. New Labour lost lets get on with it.
Life and politics and football is a lot more complicated.
-
I think what's happening in Greece etc demonstrates why we should act now. I'm no expert on what happened 20 years ago, hell I'm 22 years old why should I comment on it, you lived through it. But in reality times have changed, political parties change. Afterall in the 19th century it was the Tories who were seen as the party of the working class.
Textbook wise though of course it would make sense to protect people now. But the public finance situation is so grave that we just have to start cutting the debt, it cannot be allowed to keep growing exponentially. You'll see how bad it is when the national accounts are finally released and they should be now the election has passed, afterall the previous government delayed its release by 9 months.
-
Isn't that why you vote? For your own interests? My mum and dad were far better off under conservative rule. I personally wouldn't vote for labour because of the society they have built in this country that it is easier to stay at home and milk the country dry than it is to go out and earn an honest living. Only under New Labour would you be given 150 notes for a new suit of you are unemployed. Meanwhile poor old Mavis down the road has British Gas cutting off her gas and leccy because she can't afford to pay the bills.
A two faced Government with no morals who would rather give an easy ride to work shy scum than it would look after it's elderly citizens who fought for our freedom sixty years ago,
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
MrFrost wrote:
I was brought up with a Tory Government. I never went without.
Lucky you. I had mates who didn't work for the thick end of a decade. Still, everyone for themselves eh?
I just have to laugh at the suggestion ... that we were within minutes of having the banks close their doors for good. It's nonsense.
As I said in the other post, easy to scoff now and say it was nothing. But the people in the know, those who had to make the decisions were shitting bricks at the time. None of them had EVER known a situation like it. Without Government intervention on a massive scale, some banks WOULD have collapsed. Some people WOULD have lost everything. No question.
But that wasn't half the problem. The far, far, far bigger problem was that the banks themselves had lost confidence in the system. They had become terrified to lend money to each other, in case someone else went the way of Lehamn Brothers and the whole thing collapsed. The banks had become the equivalent of the old lass keeping her life savings under the bed. And if that had not been sorted out, the result would have been that the supply of credit that the entire Western economy depends upon would have dried up. In simple terms, the Western economy would have collapsed. Viable businesses would have gone kaput by the thousand, because they woyuld not have been able to get credit to see them over a cashflow problem. MILLIONS, many millions would have been put out of work. No exaggeration. We WERE that close.
And it WOULD have happened if Brown had not shown the way out of it. The American's didn't have the first idea what to do. No-one in Europe knew what to do. After Brown announced our bank bail out plan, the rest of the world (Governments of all political colours) rushed to do the same thing within days.
The reason that we have (only) had a bad recession, not a decade-long Mother of All Depressions is because we were lucky enough to have Brown in position.
You lot can sleep easy in your beds and say, \"It wasn't that big a deal.\" You were lucky enough to have the man you needed to steer us through it, when (according to comments on here) you didn't even have an inkling of how dangerous the situation was. God help us if Osbourne had been at the helm.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
I think what's happening in Greece etc demonstrates why we should act now. I'm no expert on what happened 20 years ago, hell I'm 22 years old why should I comment on it, you lived through it. But in reality times have changed, political parties change. Afterall in the 19th century it was the Tories who were seen as the party of the working class.
Textbook wise though of course it would make sense to protect people now. But the public finance situation is so grave that we just have to start cutting the debt, it cannot be allowed to keep growing exponentially. You'll see how bad it is when the national accounts are finally released and they should be now the election has passed, afterall the previous government delayed its release by 9 months.
Where to start?
1) I'm 43. I didn't live through the Holocaust, the Somme, the Tolpuddle Martyrs or the employment of kids down the pit, but I still have opinions on the morality of it.
2) Of course political parties can change. But EVERY SINGLE economic policy of this lot says that they are ideological Thatcherites. It's POLICIES that matter, not blind naive hope that things will be different this time.
3) You think the Tories were the on the side of the working class in the 19th Century? Give me strength.
4) We are not REMOTELY in the same position as Greece. We have a similar current deficit, but nothing like their level of overall debt. THAT is why Greece is such a basket case.
5) There is more than one way to cut a deficit. One way is to slash spending. That's what we are now going to get. The other way is to encourage growth. That is what we are NOT going to get.
The saddest thing of all about this mate, is that it is YOU who will suffer. The savage cuts in public sector spending will depress the overall economy and mean that we will emerge more slowly from recession (or dip back into it). It's your age group that will bear the brunt. I know you're having problems as it is, but they will be exacerbated by the economic policies of the Tories.
-
MrFrost wrote:
Isn't that why you vote? For your own interests?
As I say. Different outlooks. I'll be honest with you - I personally would be better off in the long term under a Tory Government. Call me an old softie, but I think there's more to life than my own bank account.
And on THAT note cocker, I'm off to sleep the sleep of the righteous...
PS: No comments about the things I said about the banks?
-
Rigoglioso wrote:
Making cuts will effect everyone and some people may view it as the wrong option. However, I'm pretty sure in every recession there has ever been, people will have been taken aback by the savage nature of the recession - irrespective of whether it be Tory or Labour who's been in power.
At the risk of sounding like a patronising old git, you have no idea what a savage recession is. Because you have been cushioned in this one by deliberate government policies. Ask someone who is 35 or older what a savage recession feels like.
Cuts are needed now! Not later, NOW, to prevent us from reaching a similar situation to Greece.
As I said before, it's a matter of timing. Of course cuts are required. Absolutely no doubt about that. But the timing is crucial. Cut too alte and sure, the debt gets bigger than it need be, and the economy overheats. But cutting too early is equally dangerous. It risks shafting the recovery and making the recession far more severe than it needs to be.
Of course, Cameron's lot were calling for cuts 2 years ago. It's in their DNA. Such cuts would have severely worsened the recession. Paul Krugman (again) called that policy \"disastrous\". So who's judgment would you trust? A Noble Laureate or the bloke who used to run the Eton tuck shop?
You'll have the pleasure of watching and learning first hand now my friend over the next 5 years.
-
I think I'm right in saying that after three terms in government, change within the party itself is needed. New ideas and new faces are needed for Labour.
Also, it sounds stupid but this election was a good election to lose. The Conservatives were left with a choice between either a minority government, which would struggle to get things through the HoC, or a coalition which would be established between two parties with fundamental differences, bringing obvious difficulties within this new coalition government. I do hope this coalition works for the good of the country but I feel it will be an uphill battle throughout. Both parties could be damaged when the next election is called (looking like fixed terms of 5 years will be installed) presenting Labour with a perfect opportunity to form government again in 5 years.
Labour obviously understood the potential positives and chance to rebuild their party, hence claims from the Lib Dems that Labour representatives in the meetings and negotiations seemed to have very little interest in reaching any agreement.
I have not read through all of this thread. Sorry if what I've said has already been discussed.
-
I don't know why everyone is getting worked up. The end of the world is only a little over 2 years away. We'll all laugh about this then.
-
MrFrost wrote:
Isn't that why you vote? For your own interests? My mum and dad were far better off under conservative rule. I personally wouldn't vote for labour because of the society they have built in this country that it is easier to stay at home and milk the country dry than it is to go out and earn an honest living. Only under New Labour would you be given 150 notes for a new suit of you are unemployed. Meanwhile poor old Mavis down the road has British Gas cutting off her gas and leccy because she can't afford to pay the bills.
A two faced Government with no morals who would rather give an easy ride to work shy scum than it would look after it's elderly citizens who fought for our freedom sixty years ago,
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
MrFrost wrote:
I was brought up with a Tory Government. I never went without.
Lucky you. I had mates who didn't work for the thick end of a decade. Still, everyone for themselves eh?
I just have to laugh at the suggestion ... that we were within minutes of having the banks close their doors for good. It's nonsense.
As I said in the other post, easy to scoff now and say it was nothing. But the people in the know, those who had to make the decisions were shitting bricks at the time. None of them had EVER known a situation like it. Without Government intervention on a massive scale, some banks WOULD have collapsed. Some people WOULD have lost everything. No question.
But that wasn't half the problem. The far, far, far bigger problem was that the banks themselves had lost confidence in the system. They had become terrified to lend money to each other, in case someone else went the way of Lehamn Brothers and the whole thing collapsed. The banks had become the equivalent of the old lass keeping her life savings under the bed. And if that had not been sorted out, the result would have been that the supply of credit that the entire Western economy depends upon would have dried up. In simple terms, the Western economy would have collapsed. Viable businesses would have gone kaput by the thousand, because they woyuld not have been able to get credit to see them over a cashflow problem. MILLIONS, many millions would have been put out of work. No exaggeration. We WERE that close.
And it WOULD have happened if Brown had not shown the way out of it. The American's didn't have the first idea what to do. No-one in Europe knew what to do. After Brown announced our bank bail out plan, the rest of the world (Governments of all political colours) rushed to do the same thing within days.
The reason that we have (only) had a bad recession, not a decade-long Mother of All Depressions is because we were lucky enough to have Brown in position.
You lot can sleep easy in your beds and say, \"It wasn't that big a deal.\" You were lucky enough to have the man you needed to steer us through it, when (according to comments on here) you didn't even have an inkling of how dangerous the situation was. God help us if Osbourne had been at the helm.
I really do take exception with your statement, you make it sound like the job center is an offshoot of Next.
The reality of it is, if you get a job, and need the clothes for that job, then you get help to buy what is in essence your uniform. You can't have it both ways, bitch about the unemployed, then whine like a Daily mail reader when they actually get a job.
but then, isn't that what being a tory is all about, I'm alright jack, f**k the rest?
Oh and another thing, not everyone on the dole actually wants to be on it, and believe you me, unless you are dishonest and crafty enough to milk the system then it is a hellish thing to be on, ask Filo, yet people lump everyone together as one amorphous mass and then demonise them.
when you are that poor for the majority, all that is left is your pride.
-
I think Cammo will be in for a bit yet. His Mrs is having a baby, and I would suggest the media/front pages are going to love that with the arrrrrh approach.
It's all new at the mo, but there are going to be some serious debates and voting once the newness wears off, I am sure many of this coalition will not vote against their own morals and the values of their party. I feel there are interesting times ahead.
I also feel Labour and Tory are as close now as they have ever been (almost like the 2 American parties), there is no alternative vote, and the propaganda machine will not allow it.
I'm starting to feel like Nudga, nearly all are out of touch with the man/woman/family on the street. 2 out of the 3 of our local MP's were pushed onto Donny as safe seats by the party spin (and not Donny people), with a view to being high flyers. It would not surprise me to see the next leader as being one of them. The 3rd MP Winterton is the only Donny person. And that's Rosie who went to Hill House Prep and Donny Grammar for Girls. Well done Rosie, but it seems even she is not a typical Donny bod.
-
I can't see how this coalition goverment will work?
both Lib Dems and the Tories both have differant polices with Immigration and Taxes and a couple of other things.I can see other election happening in a years time just watch
-
What this election has proved for me is that when you vote there are only 2 options, Tory or Labour, a vote for the Lib Dems is a wasted vote. The last few days have been very interesting, the next 12 months will be just as interesting, I really do hope that the present regime prove me wrong and lead us away from the economic crisis, but my instinct is based on previous Tory Governments and the fact that traditionally the Liberals and Conservatives are miles apart on most things, that we will be voting again long before the fixed 5 year deal the Lib-Con coalition agreed
-
The reality is that I know of someone who when for an interview as a kitchen assistant, and was given a new shuit from the job centre. Now when did you last see someone peeling spuds wearing a suit?
And I never said everyone who is on the dole is a scrounger. But Labour have bred a Jeremy Kyle culture in this country, where it is easier to pop out a few kids, do fcuk all with your life and rape the system.
jucyberry wrote:
MrFrost wrote:
Isn't that why you vote? For your own interests? My mum and dad were far better off under conservative rule. I personally wouldn't vote for labour because of the society they have built in this country that it is easier to stay at home and milk the country dry than it is to go out and earn an honest living. Only under New Labour would you be given 150 notes for a new suit of you are unemployed. Meanwhile poor old Mavis down the road has British Gas cutting off her gas and leccy because she can't afford to pay the bills.
A two faced Government with no morals who would rather give an easy ride to work shy scum than it would look after it's elderly citizens who fought for our freedom sixty years ago,
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
MrFrost wrote:
I was brought up with a Tory Government. I never went without.
Lucky you. I had mates who didn't work for the thick end of a decade. Still, everyone for themselves eh?
I just have to laugh at the suggestion ... that we were within minutes of having the banks close their doors for good. It's nonsense.
As I said in the other post, easy to scoff now and say it was nothing. But the people in the know, those who had to make the decisions were shitting bricks at the time. None of them had EVER known a situation like it. Without Government intervention on a massive scale, some banks WOULD have collapsed. Some people WOULD have lost everything. No question.
But that wasn't half the problem. The far, far, far bigger problem was that the banks themselves had lost confidence in the system. They had become terrified to lend money to each other, in case someone else went the way of Lehamn Brothers and the whole thing collapsed. The banks had become the equivalent of the old lass keeping her life savings under the bed. And if that had not been sorted out, the result would have been that the supply of credit that the entire Western economy depends upon would have dried up. In simple terms, the Western economy would have collapsed. Viable businesses would have gone kaput by the thousand, because they woyuld not have been able to get credit to see them over a cashflow problem. MILLIONS, many millions would have been put out of work. No exaggeration. We WERE that close.
And it WOULD have happened if Brown had not shown the way out of it. The American's didn't have the first idea what to do. No-one in Europe knew what to do. After Brown announced our bank bail out plan, the rest of the world (Governments of all political colours) rushed to do the same thing within days.
The reason that we have (only) had a bad recession, not a decade-long Mother of All Depressions is because we were lucky enough to have Brown in position.
You lot can sleep easy in your beds and say, \"It wasn't that big a deal.\" You were lucky enough to have the man you needed to steer us through it, when (according to comments on here) you didn't even have an inkling of how dangerous the situation was. God help us if Osbourne had been at the helm.
I really do take exception with your statement, you make it sound like the job center is an offshoot of Next.
The reality of it is, if you get a job, and need the clothes for that job, then you get help to buy what is in essence your uniform. You can't have it both ways, bitch about the unemployed, then whine like a Daily mail reader when they actually get a job.
but then, isn't that what being a tory is all about, I'm alright jack, fcuk the rest?
Oh and another thing, not everyone on the dole actually wants to be on it, and believe you me, unless you are dishonest and crafty enough to milk the system then it is a hellish thing to be on, ask Filo, yet people lump everyone together as one amorphous mass and then demonise them.
when you are that poor for the majority, all that is left is your pride.
-
MrFrost wrote:
And I never said everyone who is on the dole is a scrounger. But Labour have bred a Jeremy Kyle culture in this country, where it is easier to pop out a few kids, do fcuk all with your life and rape the system.
Damn right. I know people who do exactly that and it's not on. I don't get handouts as a student, I have to pay mine back. As it is I'd have been better off not bothering with uni. :(
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
MrFrost wrote:
And I never said everyone who is on the dole is a scrounger. But Labour have bred a Jeremy Kyle culture in this country, where it is easier to pop out a few kids, do fcuk all with your life and rape the system.
Damn right. I know people who do exactly that and it's not on. I don't get handouts as a student, I have to pay mine back. As it is I'd have been better off not bothering with uni. :(
When asked in an interview why labour had lost so many seats,Labour MP Ben Bradshaw basically said hard working families are sick and tired of seeing other families living on the same estate as them , being better off by living on benefits.
Well it's a bit late now matey ,if ever there's a case of after the horse as bolted.
-
CusworthRovers wrote:
I also feel Labour and Tory are as close now as they have ever been (almost like the 2 American parties), there is no alternative vote, and the propaganda machine will not allow it.
I'm starting to feel like Nudga, nearly all are out of touch with the man/woman/family on the street. 2 out of the 3 of our local MP's were pushed onto Donny as safe seats by the party spin (and not Donny people), with a view to being high flyers. It would not surprise me to see the next leader as being one of them. The 3rd MP Winterton is the only Donny person. And that's Rosie who went to Hill House Prep and Donny Grammar for Girls. Well done Rosie, but it seems even she is not a typical Donny bod.
There's something in that, all three parties are fighting over the middle ground desperately trying to appeal to middle England. Really I didn't think there was a great deal of difference in their policies in most areas.
Perhaps that party explains why the Lib Dems and Tories reportedly found they got on so well during these negotiations? That said I'd take a bet now that it'll be the issue of our relationship with Europe that will be the failing. They couldn't be further apart on that one.
-
Some more interesting points on this thread tonight. And some more of the unthinking, flippant and utterly valueless prejudice from Mr Frost and his friends. I am staggered by the inability of folk like that to actually pause to think for a second. You may disagree. \\I have no problem with that. But to carry on spouting claptrap like \"I don't know why everyone is getting worked up\" simply demonstrates the utter fatuousness of the person saying it. If you disagree, give us a good reason why we are wrong! That's the entire essence of debate. As my old Dad used to tell me, 'Thesis, antithesis, synthesis!'. Mind you, I don't suppose you'll understand what that means either....
But River Don made the point about three parties fighting over the middle ground. As I'm sure Don knows, that's simple political strageic thinking in action. To win, any party has to appeal to the most people it can. If you are a left wing party, you will appeal only to those on the left. If you are a right wing one, ditto. But if either party moves its policies towards the centre, then not only do they have appeal to the majority of those on their natural wing (excepting only those on the far out edges) but they will also have some appeal to those not too far from the centre but on the other side. It's a simple policy designed to maiximise ones chances. Now, when Maggie won, she was out on the far right. So how come she won? Because the country was so hacked off with her predeccessors. How come she carried on winning when she was the most unpopular Prime Minister we ever had? Because she was saved by the Labour Party committing suicide by electing Michael Foot as its leader - a nice bloke but quite far left, and, the fact that Maggie managed to instigate a war with some tin pot South American country. Always was a good way to divert attention from political troubles at home - look for glamour, excitement and unity from abroad. Nixon did it. Countless 19thC British leaders did it. Maggie did it. (And I can already see the shocked and appalled response that that line is going to bring. But that cannot change its fundamental truth).
This country is not good at managing coalitions. We've not had many, and those we have had have always ended in tears. The odds are strong that this one will too. Which raises another interesting question: if we have fixed 5 year parliaments, how will a Government govern when it loses a vote of confidence?
Anyway, I've had a really good day. Alexander won a prize this morning speaking at the Cheltenham Festival of the Spoken Word. Though I say it msyelf, he was bloody good. And this afternoon he took a wicket and hit the most glorious cover drive through a sodden outfield to the boundary. I'm well chuffed. And tossers who are unable to think, and even worse unable to put together any rational case to support their prejudice can stew in the juice which is coming.
Cheers
BobG
-
Bob if you read, you would see why I don't want a labour goverenment. As for being flippent - well what's the point worrying about things that might not even happen. The last Tory goverent had no adverse effect on my family and in fact have been worse off under Labour.
I'd also like to know who the he'll you think you are insulting my intelligence. You've got a massive chip on your shoulder pal.
-
With one short statement you shoqw exactly why you do vote Tory \" The last Tory goverent had no adverse effect on my family\" so therefore I don't give a s*** about anybody else or whether it is morally correct, because I have won. That is the reason that Torys exist, the ultimate selfish attitude that dismisses anybody else and would never raise a finger to help their fellow man, but we are all Christians of course!
I have never been able to put myself in that mindset, which is why I am an atheist and a socialist, I have always thought about how actions affect others before I make a decision, even if it has cost me money or time. Very weak of me in your eyes I know, but that does allow me to live with myself, the Torys I have known have no conscience.
-
my family comes first. Sorry about that.
I've also seen a friends haulage firm go bust due to the crazy hike in fuel duty in the last government. An elderly family member forced to sell her home to pay for resesential care.
A goverenment that puts assylum seekers and the work shy before decent working folk and the elderly.
Thanks but I'd rather vote BNP.
Barmby Rover wrote:
With one short statement you shoqw exactly why you do vote Tory \" The last Tory goverent had no adverse effect on my family\" so therefore I don't give a s*** about anybody else or whether it is morally correct, because I have won. That is the reason that Torys exist, the ultimate selfish attitude that dismisses anybody else and would never raise a finger to help their fellow man, but we are all Christians of course!
I have never been able to put myself in that mindset, which is why I am an atheist and a socialist, I have always thought about how actions affect others before I make a decision, even if it has cost me money or time. Very weak of me in your eyes I know, but that does allow me to live with myself, the Torys I have known have no conscience.
-
I am not surprised by that at all Mr.Frost, the home of the none thinking , blaming anybody who is slightly different for their own ills. Don't think for God's sake, it might hurt.
Bythe way I hope to see you spitting bile and asking for JET,Stocky,Deano and any other foreigners to be thrown out of Donny, after all they are leaching off the true Brits and taking their jobs, that sort of scum should be sent \"home\" shouldn't they. Or maybe we ought to just start building the gas chambers to throw the Polish population into.
-
Another little thought: I have never, ever, ever, understood how anyone who claims to be a 'Christian' can vote anythng other than for a left leaning party. Think about it....
Of course, carpetbaggers like some of our friends on here are always free to vote selfishly. It's the ultimate expression of the proto fascist.
Cheers
BobG
-
Out of all the pro Tory voters in this thread I`ve yet to see anything that remotely resembles a reasoned argument as to why the Tory`s will be better than Labour. The only comments made are we need a change or my family did alright under the Tory`s, not one reason given about how they will be better!
In contrast the Anti Tory`s have come up with some well constructed arguments as to why we`ll all be royally shagged by the Tory`s, ignorance is bliss!
-
BobG wrote:
Another little thought: I have never, ever, ever, understood how anyone who claims to be a 'Christian' can vote anythng other than for a left leaning party. Think about it....
Ah Bob, you forget the Gospel according to Maggie. This was the woman who, with a straight face, once said in a speech that the only reason that the Good Samaritan was remembered was that he had made enough money to be able the poor man. Good eh? That really captures the deep and timeless message of the Bible. It's a bit like the Deep South bible basher I once heard saying \"God made diamonds for the rich people.\"
Then again, there was Maggie walking into No 10 in 1979, quoting St Francis of Asissi: \"Where there is doubt, let me bring faith. Where there is discord, let me bring harmony,\" etc.
'Course, the poor lass was emotional walking up Downing Street for the first time and fluffed her lines. What she actually meant was, \"Where there is heavy industry, let me bring the ravages of the free market. Where there is robust working class society, let me bring carnage. Where there is privilege, let me bring tax cuts.\" It can happen to anyone.
-
Filo wrote:
Out of all the pro Tory voters in this thread I`ve yet to see anything that remotely resembles a reasoned argument as to why the Tory`s will be better than Labour. The only comments made are we need a change or my family did alright under the Tory`s, not one reason given about how they will be better!
In contrast the Anti Tory`s have come up with some well constructed arguments as to why we`ll all be royally shagged by the Tory`s, ignorance is bliss!
That is the most depressing thing about our democracy. People don't vote for policies. They vote on a general feeling. The policies are too difficult to mentally juggle, so you end up going on a gut instinct. The absolute anthithesis of what theoretical democracy should be about - rational, careful assessment of the relative merits of competing ideas. No wonder the Chinese use the word \"Democracy\" as an insult.
And I'm not saying this from a party viewpoint - it cuts across party lines. It happens every time an incumbent government is booted out.
I remember asking Labour supporting friends and family in 1997 what they expected of Tony Blair in terms of cold hard policies. Not one could reply. Neither could I, because he deliberately didn't say anything of substance - it was all about giving people the right feeling, not about appealing to intelligence.
Go back to the previous time a Government was voted out - when Maggie won in 1979. They used those brilliant \"Labour Isn't Working\" dole queue posters. They said they had no plans to double VAT (THE most vicious tax on the poorest). People trusted them. They put VAT up from 8% to 15% in their first Budget*. And they doubled unemployment in their first 18 months. The folk who voted for them never saw that coming, because they never engaged intellectually with the policies. They voted on instinct.
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
-
Actually BST, the not so astonishing fact that the intellectually challenged have the right to vote at all is probably the biggest single weakness of democracy at all.
What do the IC base the choice of their vote on I wonder?
- What Ma and Pa voted
- Pretty/handsome faces
- Sound bites
- what the bloke down the pub said
- my family has done (or not done) alright
Anything else?
They are a challenge to the long term existance of democracy. It's that unthinking, uncaring approach that allows me of ill will to succeed. I'm sure you'll know Edmund Burke's famous line that \"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing\". These guys won't face up to the implications of what we see about us today (And I'm not talking about who won and lost the sodding election here either).
If I were Lord of the Universe I'd disenfranchise the lot. By Diktat. That seems to be philosophy most akin to their bent.
Cheers
BobG
-
The thing I love about the forum in general and the political threads specifically, is how much I learn. I think it's important to just listen to what is being said, particularly if you haven't experienced what others have. Listen to what they say and then watch what happens and hopefully you'll recognize these policies or however they choose to package the measures, when they come.
I used to work in the NYS Assembly, which is part of THE most dysfunctional state legislature in the country, and occasionally bills which were passed contained nasty little hidden measures in the same legislation as more palpable measures forcing the Members to vote for the bill, while explaining to their constituents that it was for the 'greater good' (if they even realized it was in there at all). So watching out for packaging is key. So who knows how the coalition will go about this process, but it will be interesting to watch.
-
the tories under thatcher managed to kill off many things in this country.. for you it was the mines, for us here it has been the slow decline and eventual death of many rural villages.
living as I do in a costal area the tories 'wonderful' idea to sell off the housing stock at knock down prices has been a slow running cancer. Greedy kids scooping up their parents council houses to sell off at a profit when ma and pa pop off..I'm sorry, but when does council housing stock become anyones birthright. it makes me so mad. My aunt still lives in the same house, she has done for 80 years, she is the only tennant still in her row, only one of three houses inhabited all year round, for there in lies the rub. around her when the houses are sold off, they aren't bought by local people.. they are bought by greedy bas**rds who want a second house by the seaside.
the number of youngsters dwindle, with very few cheap houses they have to move out, shops close and eventually the village dies.
-
So now your finding fault with the right to buy scheme. Without that slot of people simply wouldn't be able to get on the property ladder.
Bob you like to show off on here with your big words and flashy quotes. It doesn't impress me. When it comes to politics I will vote for a party I will vote for the one I think will benefit me and those close to me.
I would never vote for a government so quick to throw handouts to illegal imigrants and scum who have no intention of ever working. I want a goverenment who will look after those who earn it and who are legally a citizen of this country. Those who don't should frankly be left to rot.
There are people genuinely out of work who want to. This isn't aimed at you.
jucyberry wrote:
the tories under thatcher managed to kill off many things in this country.. for you it was the mines, for us here it has been the slow decline and eventual death of many rural villages.
living as I do in a costal area the tories 'wonderful' idea to sell off the housing stock at knock down prices has been a slow running cancer. Greedy kids scooping up their parents council houses to sell off at a profit when ma and pa pop off..I'm sorry, but when does council housing stock become anyones birthright. it makes me so mad. My aunt still lives in the same house, she has done for 80 years, she is the only tennant still in her row, only one of three houses inhabited all year round, for there in lies the rub. around her when the houses are sold off, they aren't bought by local people.. they are bought by greedy bas**rds who want a second house by the seaside.
the number of youngsters dwindle, with very few cheap houses they have to move out, shops close and eventually the village dies.
-
Take a leaf out of my book. Don't bother with expensive burglar alarms, outside lights and all the latest hi-tech security gadgets. If you don't want the dregs and scum coming anywhere near to your house. Simply hang a 2 worded sign on the front of your house:
JOB CENTRE
-
CusworthRovers wrote:
Take a leaf out of my book. Don't bother with expensive burglar alarms, outside lights and all the latest hi-tech security gadgets. If you don't want the dregs and scum coming anywhere near to your house. Simply hang a 2 worded sign on the front of your house:
JOB CENTRE
One slight flaw in that my old 6 fingered bog woppit, the Job Centre is where you go to sign for your benefits
-
I thought it was just a place where you go to look for work. As a mancunian once said 'that joke isn't funny anymore'........now
You've ruined it now. You've destroyed my life. I want to kill myself.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
-
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
\"Believe in better. Don't Believe in BNP, Believe in BST!\" :silly:
-
Yup Mr Frost, I am executing my democratic right to express my opinion.
As you don't live around here I will make allowances for you. I just might be kinder than most on here...
I live in an area that is highly desirable (unfortunately) There is very little social housing, although after twenty plus years of selling the housing stock off, we are finally getting some new, very small estates being built in some villages.
I know one man who is a serial council house buyer, he is currently in his fourth, after buying three in his name and then his fathers, two of which were sold for a profit, one he rents out and one he and his girlfriend lives in.
Now you tell me how that is right?
And as you turn your nose up at the welfare system, I take it if you ever fall on hard times you will be refusing any assistance?
-
bobjimwilly wrote:
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
\"Believe in better. Don't Believe in BNP, Believe in BST!\" :silly:
BST is my forum hero, brilliance and sharp wit, what a man!
-
\"Bob you like to show off on here with your big words and flashy quotes. It doesn't impress me. When it comes to politics I will vote for a party I will vote for the one I think will benefit me and those close to me.\"
I would give your opinions a huge amount more credence if you would, just for once, actually put together a reasoned argument about why voting Conservative is the better option. But no. Instead we have you, once again, displaying four amazing traits in just two sentences: a desire to publicly glory in your ignorance, utter selfishness, an inability to respond with anything other than personal attack when challenged and, worst of all, a complete lack of any knowledge whatsoever about the world you inhabit.
You can take a horse to water....
Cheers
BobG
-
I could have sworn I heard on the radio today that the new government are considering putting vat on the price of buying a house. That is one quick way of slamming us back into a recession as no one would be able to afford to buy, it's already hard enough for first time buyers.
P.S although I do watch the news every night, I still haven't got a clue of each parties policies because all they seem to do is slag each other off and tell each other to \"get real\", it's difficult to cut through the crap and learn what they are all about. And when you do actually get to glean a bit of information out of it all, you can tell it's bullshit because they only wanted the votes and they won't adhere to their \"promises\". Intellectually redundent I know, shoot me!
-
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
Aye, go on! Blame it on me!
-
jucyberry wrote:
bobjimwilly wrote:
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
\"Believe in better. Don't Believe in BNP, Believe in BST!\" :silly:
BST is my forum hero, brilliance and sharp wit, what a man!
And that's before you've seen me bum in a pair of tennis shorts. And me beer gut which kind of balances it...
-
BobG wrote:
\"Bob you like to show off on here with your big words and flashy quotes. It doesn't impress me. When it comes to politics I will vote for a party I will vote for the one I think will benefit me and those close to me.\"
I would give your opinions a huge amount more credence if you would, just for once, actually put together a reasoned argument about why voting Conservative is the better option. But no. Instead we have you, once again, displaying four amazing traits in just two sentences: a desire to publicly glory in your ignorance, utter selfishness, an inability to respond with anything other than personal attack when challenged and, worst of all, a complete lack of any knowledge whatsoever about the world you inhabit.
You can take a horse to water....
Cheers
BobG
if you read you would see my argument. And you calle a tosser and intelectually challenged for choosing to use my vote as I see fit. Maybe we should turn to communism and take away our democracy and freedom of speech.
-
I want a government who looks after every man woman and child in this country. What ever their creed or colour. I want a government who sees all it's people as important in their own right.. One who cares for those who are in need of help and nurtures those who try.
You see unless you can say you know the ins and outs of anothers life, who are any of us to judge. But then, I believe in live and let live, not all for one and everything for me.THAT is the legacy of the last Tory government. :-)
Just got home from work, lifted this from a bunch of comments in a national newspaper..............
The absurd and venemous words of some Tory protagonists on here such as James Dene of Dorking show how marginalised the right wing have become and demonstrates their snobbery, mean spiritedness and detachment from the real world. Too often is it suggested that Labour draw their votes only from \"parasites and welfare scroungers\" while the tory support comes from the nation's salt of the earth. Well lots of hard working taxpayers voted labour, people like me who have never had a state handout of any kind. People vote labour/lib dem because they are instinctively compassionate, people vote Tory because they are instinctively selfish.
Despite the Conservatives claims of social superiority and moral high ground on here Its always interesting to note that the rudeness, insults and hostile remarks stem largely from Tory supporters.
- Tom, Middlesbrough
-
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
Indeed, and the 'tax on jobs' that the Tories opposed as such a key element of their marketing campaign, now stands exclusively as a tax on people with jobs! They weren't so keen to sell that one, while telling anyone that would listen that business leaders at the likes of Sainsbury's (who have just announced that profits have doubled) were against paying the increase in N.I. to help the sustain the recovery, but you and I that struggle to make ends meet will still have to pay it alone. Ironically the mythical 'tax on jobs' will be replaced with cuts in jobs, and the hike in VAT will hit us all.
This has been an incredibly interesting thread to read and we can all learn a thing or two from it. I must admit it's also made me realse that, at least where politics is concerned, there is almost unequivocal common ground between BST and I, that regular readers of this forum will find even more absurd than the Liberal-Conservative love in!
The whimsical lack of a social conscience expressed by some Tory sympathisers reminds me of myself in my younger days, before I grew up. Of course the welfare system has its' failings and needs tightening up, but not to recognise the crucial role of the welfare state is quite remarkable, or perhaps not when we have Tories claiming that the NHS is a \"sixty year mistake.\" I suppose as long as I am healthy I shouldn't care about the treatment of others, would seem to be a fitting attitude?
While ruling out the Tories based purely on their historical record may be a tad unfair, what more is there to go on? As BST suggests, the Cameron campaign (difficult to call it a party campaign until all the old-timers started appearing in the cabinet) was based almost solely on slogans and soundbites, with the backing of The Sun of course. If some of the Tory supporters can stand up on here and inform us of what we are to expect from the new regime (other than just trotting out 'change') then at least we may have something to hold them accountable to.
-
Jonathan wrote:
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
Indeed, and the 'tax on jobs' that the Tories opposed as such a key element of their marketing campaign, now stands exclusively as a tax on people with jobs! They weren't so keen to sell that one, while telling anyone that would listen that business leaders at the likes of Sainsbury's (who have just announced that profits have doubled) were against paying the increase in N.I. to help the sustain the recovery, but you and I that struggle to make ends meet will still have to pay it alone. Ironically the mythical 'tax on jobs' will be replaced with cuts in jobs, and the hike in VAT will hit us all.
This has been an incredibly interesting thread to read and we can all learn a thing or two from it. I must admit it's also made me realse that, at least where politics is concerned, there is almost unequivocal common ground between BST and I, that regular readers of this forum will find even more absurd than the Liberal-Conservative love in!
The whimsical lack of a social conscience expressed by some Tory sympathisers reminds me of myself in my younger days, before I grew up. Of course the welfare system has its' failings and needs tightening up, but not to recognise the crucial role of the welfare state is quite remarkable, or perhaps not when we have Tories claiming that the NHS is a \"sixty year mistake.\" I suppose as long as I am healthy I shouldn't care about the treatment of others, would seem to be a fitting attitude?
While ruling out the Tories based purely on their historical record may be a tad unfair, what more is there to go on? As BST suggests, the Cameron campaign (difficult to call it a party campaign until all the old-timers started appearing in the cabinet) was based almost solely on slogans and soundbites, with the backing of The Sun of course. If some of the Tory supporters can stand up on here and inform us of what we are to expect from the new regime (other than just trotting out 'change') then at least we may have something to hold them accountable to.
Jon. There's nobody argues more than two people on the Left politically - no wonder we never agree on football...
Must admit, I'd not picked up on the NI volte-face. Hardly surprising mind. For all the high minded words about us all being in it together, and that this is a new way of doing politics, everything is looking very much like the old Tory Party straightaway.
1) As you say, after breaking their hearts during the campaign over the fact that Labour was going to nobble the poor worker with NI increases, immediately after the election they state that they will leave this in place but relieve their business backers of their share of the tax. They give some vague assurances that the Lib Dems' higher tax allowances for the poorest will be phased in eventually to balance this - what's the betting THAT promise vanishes over the next couple of years because \"the economic situation Labour left us doesn't allow us to do this\"?
2) After spending the whole election campaign telling us they had no intention of raising VAT, everyone now knows that VAT will go up within 12-18 months. VAT always hits the very poorest the hardest. THAT is the reason why Labour has never once raised this tax, while the Tories raised it from 8% to 15% in 1979 and 15% to 17.5% in 1991. And it's also the reason why the Tories howled against Labour's temporary reduction in VAT at the start of the recession - that move disproportinately helped the very poorest in the depth of the recession.
3) After telling us that they will have an age of New Politics, the stitch up on the Fixed Term Parliament stinks like the worst 1970s backroom deal. Why choose a random number like 55% as the vote required to bring down a Government in future? Is it because the Tories and Lib Dems MPs combined tot up to 56%? So, what this means is that no combination of votes can bring down the Govt other than the Tories and Lib Dems acting together. If the Lib Dems get shafted in the coalition, tough shit - there's nothing they can do about it and we'd be left with a Tory minority Government. AND, if the Tories and Lib Dems both sniff at some point that the polls are in their favour, they could use some world-shaking event (another 9/11, economic collapse etc) to say, \"Ah, yeah, we SAID there would be a fixed term Parliament, but in light of the current world events, we need another mandate\" and between them use their 56% of MPs to call an election. This is the most obscenely, nakedly anti-democratic move in decades, if not centuries. This isn't open, New Politics. It's a bloody anti-democratic disgrace.
4) And the best one of all. Clegg and Cameron spent the whole campaign looking at us all doe-eyed and asking us to vote for \"change\". What \"change\" apparently means is a Cabinet with 65% of its members being Oxbridge graduates and 61% being public-school educated. Change alright. Change back to what things were like under Harold Macmillan and Lord Home in the 50s and 60s.
-
I agree wholeheartedly on the stitch-up - one of the most undemocratic moves imagineable, and the fact that it is introduced by an un-elected government makes it beyond belief!
What strikes me most is the lack of courage in their convictions displayed by the Tories. The prospect of running with a minority government was entirely plausible given the election result. Admittedly it would have been unstable in the short term and likely resulted in another election fairly quickly - something I think the electorate voted for way ahead of what we've ended up with. If they had genuine courage in their convictions and policies then surely they could have staved off any lack of confidence in the markets and, given the backing of the right wing press and the \"immediate positive change\" they told us we'll see throughout their campaign, surely they could have gained their majority in the next election?
Watching the squirming that's currently taking place is just so cringeworthy. Gordon Brown was rounded on for muttering about a somewhat xenophobic woman in reaction to fending off her questions, but now we are expected to believe that a cobbled together blend of two parties that fought on opposite ends of the spectrum can form a 'stable government' in the national interest. I feel genuinely sympathy for the people that voted 'liberal' on issues close to their heart, how they must feel now when they see William Hague flying out to America to endorse the war on their behalf!
The smart money would be on Vince Cable to be the first memeber of the new cabinet to stand up for his own beliefs. He directly opposed the immediate spending cuts that threaten the recovery, and has been shunted out into a non-job that he wanted to abolish anyway. As probably the biggest asset in the cabinet, his departure would be a blow to the national interest - if we thought for one second that this is what the coalition has been forged to represent. It remains to be seen just how much unrest ensues after the initial honeymoon period, it is simply absurd that measures have been put in place to lock in what is effectively an un-elected experiment.
-
MrFrost wrote:
I've also seen a friends haulage firm go bust due to the crazy hike in fuel duty in the last government. An elderly family member forced to sell her home to pay for resesential care.
A goverenment that puts assylum seekers and the work shy before decent working folk and the elderly.
quote]
My understanding is that fuel is to hike up again under this new ConDem government to £1.30 a litre? Bloody Gordon Brown strikes again ;)
Even though I dont agree with the imigration situation and a nation of money grabbing bar steward that we have. here are a few facts, By 2008. More people were in work than ever before, claimant unemployment had reached its lowest level for over 30 years, long-term claimant unemployment was less than a quarter of its 1997 level and the numbers claiming other welfare benefits were falling for the first time in decades. We will have more people out of work, that you and I are paying for under ConDem.
Under the ConDem party MY family will suffer terribly. The NHS care my son depends on at 3 years of age to keep him alive wont be as good, My wife works for the NHS which is going to be tense times, my sister who is training for the NHS, looks set for a kick backwards.
Yes I voted Labour for the NHS, Schools, Pensioners energy bill discount, free buss services to over 60's (who have paid in to the country for many years) free swimming for children and pensioners, Rest bite care for those in need, sure start that my son benefitted from using, to help his development after 2 heart operations in three years. Luckily my grandma is even able to get personal care at home, as she is bedridden. I pay my taxes like the next man, spend a fortune in the car and van on fuel too, but I wouldn't begrudge anyone making use of these services. Something that ConDem will.
This is not a personal attack on you or your beliefs, but by christ it could have been alot worse over the last 13 years? As Eddie Izzard said, Are Labour perfect? NO, nor claim to be. Are all the good things down to them? No. Sure the deficit needs to be addressed, but the economy is not stable enough to yet.
Is Britain broken?....Well it wasn't, but soon could be.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
jucyberry wrote:
bobjimwilly wrote:
DonnyNoel wrote:
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
* And on THAT score, I'd put my great, fecund, sweaty gonads on VAT being increased to 20% within the next 12 months. Despite the Tories insisting that \"we have no plans to increase VAT\" during the campaign.
Impressive - its just been on the radio that a 3% rise in VAT is \"on the cards\"! Wonder if they read this forum!
\"Believe in better. Don't Believe in BNP, Believe in BST!\" :silly:
BST is my forum hero, brilliance and sharp wit, what a man!
And that's before you've seen me bum in a pair of tennis shorts. And me beer gut which kind of balances it...
Love the idea of voting for BST - just think of the slogans.....
Vote BST and be a hour ahead of everyone else.......
Vote BST and make the most of your daylight hours......
Vote BST if you don't want Zulu in England.......
BST is for the Alpha male.......
(The last two for those of you familiar wih Zulu, Alpha, Beta time etc)
Gets my vote every time
-
I am getting so angry just thinking about a VAT rise, let alone when it happens (because it will). My work colleagues, whilst not telling me of their voting intentions, I am sure are a good proportion Tory voters. I tried to fight my corner, told them that VAT will rise, and listened with disdain as they insisted that the country was 'f*cked' and that recession (that they they handily forget is global) is Labour's fault.
Now it is becoming clear that what I said was true - that the thieving Tory gets will likely raise VAT, they're all pretending like they don't care even though none of us have had a pay rise for the last three financial years. The Tories are going to rape us all. I just hope all they, and all other working class people who foolishly voted the Tories in this time will smile cheerfully as they bend over to be shafted from by their own chosen establishment.
What I wouldn't give to have the skills to get out of the country right now...
-
Another example of the two faced tories and the right wing press was they constantly harped on about Gordon Brown being an un elected PM, have they forgot about John Major?
They also banged on about how they won the election even though they did n`t have a majority and now they want to insure their tenure in Downing Street by increasing the majority needed for a no confidence vote to 55%! and this is only the start, they were desperate for power at all costs!
-
And another thing, that William Haugue born and bred in an industrial area and he`s a Tory, what a fcuking tosser!
I wish I did n`t buy Haugue`s Dandylion and Burdock when I was a kid now!
-
Not to mention that the Tory T**TS got in power by an unelected Deputy Priminister, who lost more seast than when he started the election campaign. What a Fin Joke.
-
RTID75 wrote:
I am getting so angry just thinking about a VAT rise, let alone when it happens (because it will). My work colleagues, whilst not telling me of their voting intentions, I am sure are a good proportion Tory voters. I tried to fight my corner, told them that VAT will rise, and listened with disdain as they insisted that the country was 'f*cked' and that recession (that they they handily forget is global) is Labour's fault.
Now it is becoming clear that what I said was true - that the thieving Tory gets will likely raise VAT, they're all pretending like they don't care even though none of us have had a pay rise for the last three financial years. The Tories are going to rape us all. I just hope all they, and all other working class people who foolishly voted the Tories in this time will smile cheerfully as they bend over to be shafted from by their own chosen establishment.
What I wouldn't give to have the skills to get out of the country right now...
The Conservatives are implementing painful things such as a possibe VAT increase because they simply NEED to sort out the budget deficit. The huge budget deficit created by Labour, by printing more and more money, creating more and more debt in a stupid attempt to keep the boom going. Its just 'kicking the can down the road'.
If you use the analogy of heroin addicts, they cant just keep shooting up larger and larger doses to remain high because they will eventually die. They need to be weened off it (depression) or even go cold turkey (crash). QE = heroin, in the case of the economy. Darlings VAT decrease wasnt free you know!! it needs to be paid for, and its up to the new government to sort it out.
Under nulabour there simply isnt the motivation for people to get educated and work hard to add production to the economy. Because its just too easy to live off benefits, why have a job when you can get paid for sitting at home doing nothing?
As for the employment figures, what good is it for the economy if a huge chunk is employed in the public sector? all these people are doing is taking their pay home to add more competition for goods and services. They arent actually producing anything. Its just like an extension of the dole queue.
Whilst im at it, i'd just like to mention how brown was quick to reap the praise during the (unsustainable) boom years. But as soon as the SHTF he was even quicker to call it a 'global recession'.
I'm really surprised how people cant see the bigger picture here, sure the Conservatives will implement hard policies, but they are simply sorting the mess created by nulab and there keynsian approach. Blame nulab for the mess.
-
Filo wrote:
And another thing, that William Haugue born and bred in an industrial area and he`s a Tory, what a fcuking tosser!
I wish I did n`t buy Haugue`s Dandylion and Burdock when I was a kid now!
So you dont like the 'old etonians' bla bla bla. But when a Conservative cabinet member went to wath comp you lot still dont like it!!.
He wasnt brainwashed, he thought for himself.
-
What a fantastic thread, it really is true that politics polarises views.
For once I agree with Mr Frost ( he can vote for who ever he wants, just like we can support who we wnat, Leeds Utd anybody ?
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: )
sorry, I know how TWD loves them.... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
My view, which is no less valid then anyones, since it's all about opinion, unless it's Mr Frost or his keyboard mate in which case it has to be gospel, is that the Tories are SCUM.
lol
The thread is too long to answer everybody, but does anyone have a god given right to be \"on the property ladder\" ?
Nope
Was David Cameron picked to be the Tory leader coz he was the acceptable face of Conservatism?
In my opinion, there is no acceptable face of Conservatism( note the capital letter)
The Tories have changed, shouldn't we forget about the eighties and give them another chance?
I don't hear too many people saying, well Hitler wasn't too bad. It was so long ago lets see what the Nazi's can do now. They deserve another shot.
The predicted hike in VAT and I've also heard a rumour that CGT will also be increased. That won't affect me as I take my annual bonus in cash rather than shares but can you imagine if this had been introduced by Gordon Brown. The Mail, Express and other tory rags would have been incandescent with rage. However not a peep.
reminds me of that song lyric.....
When you realise your paper is tory, just remember there are two sides to every story.
-
\"Under nulabour there simply isnt the motivation for people to get educated and work hard to add production to the economy. Because its just too easy to live off benefits, why have a job when you can get paid for sitting at home doing nothing?
As for the employment figures, what good is it for the economy if a huge chunk is employed in the public sector? all these people are doing is taking their pay home to add more competition for goods and services. They arent actually producing anything. Its just like an extension of the dole queue\"
How typically selfish again, the Tory attitude really shines through on the ignorant in this thread. Just a small challenge for you Boomstick, try living on £64 per week when you have to pay for your electricity, gas, food, transport plus anything that might break down in your house for a couple of months. It's just too easy living off benefits is a phrase that so easily trips off the tongue for those who are incapable of understanding just how difficult it is for folks who have nothing,forget your computer to start with mate, you can't afford the connection charges to the internet for too long! Fine, have no public sector at all, no police force, no fire service, no NHS except for those rich enough to pay for the WHOLE of their treatments. No problem until you get ill mate. Mind you the weak can just go off and die quietly, oops, somebody has to bury you....No kids I presume? I will come and educate them for you, twenty+ years experience and a good teacher, mind you I have to pay for all this as well, let's say I charge you £80 per hour, the public sector is there for a reason, we pay for them as a COLECTIVE need, that means we all pay something so that all of us enjoy the benefits. Dreadful thought that you might actually help someone else though isn't it?
As I said earlier, just wait until you need help, you will discover that we do need society, the trouble is that a lot of Thatchers generation never grew up being told they must help others, the story has been for the last thirty years, \"tread on your neighbour, then you can have all of their stuff as well\", wasted on you I would imagine,but true all the same. I suppose I would say that though wouldn't I? I just educated several thousand pupils over my time as a teacher, I contributed nothing to society, just another form of sponging off the state...
-
Instead of raising taxes and vat, why don't they make it easier for people to start spending their money (and I don't mean with credit cards) and get the economy moving again. They should be putting loads of money into housing projects and renewable energy thus creating jobs for the 2.5mil on the dole que. Start exporting that is BRITISH made and stop importing so much (steel,gas, fabrics)
I've just done a job in a council tenants property, the carpets were worse than the ones at my work place, the house was a complete shit hole. BUT, the old lass had a massive 42\" lcd t.v, a laptop, an iphone,xbox, fags for every 5 mins, a trip tu't shops for some booze (at 1030 in the morning), fully decked out back garden with hot tub and a huge pond with roughly 25 koi carp in it. Some'at wrong thee'er I think.
Seems to me like it's always the working class that HAS to pull the classes either side of us out of the shit.
-
I quite agree Nudga, I ended up voting Green because instead of screaming about cutting everything to pay off debts in two years or whatever they were talking about what is needed for us a society.
So let's get a lot of people off the dole, have things manufactured here and cut our energy demands. Give away double glazing to every property that doesn't have it in this country. It increases the number of people required to fit them which removes building workers from the dole and they start paying taxes again, others are employed in the manufacture of the windows, we cut the poor's debt to the energy companies and finally and most important it would save so much energy that we could afford to do without at least one extra (and with the way they are going,Nuclear) power station. Win,win,win,win. However it involves spending public money. The fact that you would get it back with taxes etc makes no odds to the free market economists so it will never be done, to hell in a handcart etc.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
Just a small challenge for you Boomstick, try living on £64 per week when you have to pay for your electricity, gas, food, transport plus anything that might break down in your house for a couple of months. It's just too easy living off benefits is a phrase that so easily trips off the tongue for those who are incapable of understanding just how difficult it is for folks who have nothing
Well said Barmby Rover!, I tried it for a month last October, I`m 46 years old and worked at the same factory for 23 years until last year, previous to that I worked in a shipyard from leaving school, all those years paying into the system and all I could get was £64 a week, I have a mortgage, a wife, a son who`s at college because he can`t get a job and he gets £20 a week EMA and a Daughter who has only got a part time job, I`m supposed to run a house on £64 a week! f**k me our shopping bill is around £95 a week. And they say it`s easy living off benefits, you narrow minded tories are having a laugh!
-
Same here Filo last October redundant until February, no fun and it has left me with debts it will take me until at least the end of this year to climb out of. No pub, Rovers,going out at all, just work, eat cheaply and sleep for me for months and months ahead. I now work with the unemployed getting them back into jobs, and i can see how many are playing the system and how many are desperate to work, the latter are very much in the majority, good luck in your search mate.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
I quite agree Nudga, I ended up voting Green because instead of screaming about cutting everything to pay off debts in two years or whatever they were talking about what is needed for us a society.
So let's get a lot of people off the dole, have things manufactured here and cut our energy demands. Give away double glazing to every property that doesn't have it in this country. It increases the number of people required to fit them which removes building workers from the dole and they start paying taxes again, others are employed in the manufacture of the windows, we cut the poor's debt to the energy companies and finally and most important it would save so much energy that we could afford to do without at least one extra (and with the way they are going,Nuclear) power station. Win,win,win,win. However it involves spending public money. The fact that you would get it back with taxes etc makes no odds to the free market economists so it will never be done, to hell in a handcart etc.
I voted Green also as I loved their positive approach to getting this country off it's knees by creating a robust renewable energy industry and creating jobs and self sustainability. It should and could be the biggest industry in this country.
They also wanted to focus on the railways by electrifying branch lines instaed of just concentrating on the east/west coast main lines such as an electrified line from Hull to Liverpool for the exportation of goods between Ireland-England-Mainland Europe. They also want to make it more conveniant and affordable for people to stop using their cars and get on the trains.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
Same here Filo last October redundant until February, no fun and it has left me with debts it will take me until at least the end of this year to climb out of. No pub, Rovers,going out at all, just work, eat cheaply and sleep for me for months and months ahead. I now work with the unemployed getting them back into jobs, and i can see how many are playing the system and how many are desperate to work, the latter are very much in the majority, good luck in your search mate.
I`m sorted mate £5.85 an hour but it keeps the Wolves from the door, it`s a big drop mind, when your used to £13 an hour
-
Filo wrote:
Barmby Rover wrote:
Same here Filo last October redundant until February, no fun and it has left me with debts it will take me until at least the end of this year to climb out of. No pub, Rovers,going out at all, just work, eat cheaply and sleep for me for months and months ahead. I now work with the unemployed getting them back into jobs, and i can see how many are playing the system and how many are desperate to work, the latter are very much in the majority, good luck in your search mate.
I`m sorted mate £5.85 an hour but it keeps the Wolves from the door, it`s a big drop mind, when your used to £13 an hour
You're better off going self employed and playing the system that way, you'd still be paying your taxes and NI but a little bit more would be in your back pocket.
-
Nudga wrote:
Filo wrote:
Barmby Rover wrote:
Same here Filo last October redundant until February, no fun and it has left me with debts it will take me until at least the end of this year to climb out of. No pub, Rovers,going out at all, just work, eat cheaply and sleep for me for months and months ahead. I now work with the unemployed getting them back into jobs, and i can see how many are playing the system and how many are desperate to work, the latter are very much in the majority, good luck in your search mate.
I`m sorted mate £5.85 an hour but it keeps the Wolves from the door, it`s a big drop mind, when your used to £13 an hour
You're better off going self employed and playing the system that way, you'd still be paying your taxes and NI but a little bit more would be in your back pocket.
No way, MrFrost and Thinwhiteduke would have me carted off to the tower ;)
-
They couldn't possibly do that as you'd still be paying your taxes and NI and you'd have more money to spend so you'd be putting your money back into the system both ways. I see it as a positive fiddle ha ha
-
Boomstick wrote:
RTID75 wrote:
I am getting so angry just thinking about a VAT rise, let alone when it happens (because it will). My work colleagues, whilst not telling me of their voting intentions, I am sure are a good proportion Tory voters. I tried to fight my corner, told them that VAT will rise, and listened with disdain as they insisted that the country was 'f*cked' and that recession (that they they handily forget is global) is Labour's fault.
Now it is becoming clear that what I said was true - that the thieving Tory gets will likely raise VAT, they're all pretending like they don't care even though none of us have had a pay rise for the last three financial years. The Tories are going to rape us all. I just hope all they, and all other working class people who foolishly voted the Tories in this time will smile cheerfully as they bend over to be shafted from by their own chosen establishment.
What I wouldn't give to have the skills to get out of the country right now...
The Conservatives are implementing painful things such as a possibe VAT increase because they simply NEED to sort out the budget deficit. The huge budget deficit created by Labour, by printing more and more money, creating more and more debt in a stupid attempt to keep the boom going. Its just 'kicking the can down the road'.
If you use the analogy of heroin addicts, they cant just keep shooting up larger and larger doses to remain high because they will eventually die. They need to be weened off it (depression) or even go cold turkey (crash). QE = heroin, in the case of the economy. Darlings VAT decrease wasnt free you know!! it needs to be paid for, and its up to the new government to sort it out.
Under nulabour there simply isnt the motivation for people to get educated and work hard to add production to the economy. Because its just too easy to live off benefits, why have a job when you can get paid for sitting at home doing nothing?
As for the employment figures, what good is it for the economy if a huge chunk is employed in the public sector? all these people are doing is taking their pay home to add more competition for goods and services. They arent actually producing anything. Its just like an extension of the dole queue.
Whilst im at it, i'd just like to mention how brown was quick to reap the praise during the (unsustainable) boom years. But as soon as the SHTF he was even quicker to call it a 'global recession'.
I'm really surprised how people cant see the bigger picture here, sure the Conservatives will implement hard policies, but they are simply sorting the mess created by nulab and there keynsian approach. Blame nulab for the mess.
Jesus wept Boomstick. Your posts are like the thick black dribble that would come out of a compost bin if the only thing you put into it was 10 years worth of Daily Mail editorials.
There's the bigotted (and I used the word advisedly) assertions that the country is chock-a-block full of idle dole scroungers. Of course we all know one - the work-shy have ALWAYS existed. But the FACT is that employment rate in the country under Labour was the highest in two generations, and the total number of people employed was the highest in the history of the country. EVER. So how does that square with these pub-bore comments that the country is full of dole scroungers?
You'll then say that this is all produced by Public Sector jobs. Apart from the fact that this is untrue (there are more private sector jobs than ever), public sector employment means teachers, coppers, nurses etc. The Right spout their bile about how the MoD employs more civil servants than soldiers. Of COURSE the MoD does. Because THAT is the nature of modern defence and warfare. The civil servants that they decry are the likes of my old mate who is in charge of a team engineering new protection for armoured vehicles, saving lives in Afghanistan. He's a brilliant engineer/scientist with a world-wide reputation. Four times in the last year he's had private sector companies try to head hunt him with big pay offers, but he's stayed in his job out of a sense of duty and a feeling that he can make a difference. THAT sort of person doesn't exist in Daily Mail-land, but they are utterly vital to the country. These are the stories that the Right don't want to tell, because in their world, civil servant=waste of space and money. But in the real world, if you cut HIS job, in the next generation you WILL need many more troops on the ground because they will be sitting ducks.
The fact is that a strong Public Sector is VITAL to the well-being of a modern democracy. Look what happened over time when the public sector was villified and starved of funds under Thatcher. A collapsed rail system. Shocking school buildings. Third-world medical facilities (A colleague at work had a three week old baby die in intensive care in 1999 because the alarm on the monitoring system didn't work. The baby had been born in a crumbling 130 year old maternity hospital. Three weeks later, a brand new, state of the art maternity hospital opened in the city - it had been planned, built and paid for under the Labour Government.)
As for your comments on the recession - I know that Little Englanders believe that everything past the White Cliffs of Dover is a dark wilderness, but the fact is that the recession WAS a horrific world-wide crash. EVERY SINGLE major economy suffered, many of them far worse than us. Japan and Singapore are two examples of countries that had deeper and more severe recessions than us. Germany's and Italy's were similar. France's was slightly less bad (after a decade of having SIGNIFCANTLY lower growth than us, so the net effect over a decade is that we have strongly out-performed both France AND Germany). Do you think Brown was responsible for EVERY country's recession?
You say that Brown blamed the world wide recession for our problems but took credit for the previous good years. With good reason he did that. The UK was the ONLY major economy not to have a recession between 1997 and 2008. So, even when the world wide economy had problems in that decade, Brown steered us through it. Just like he pointed the entire world economy out of the utter catastrophe that would have befallen us if the banks had been allowed to collapse. You want a nightmare scenario? Imagine if Brown had called an election in 2007 after he took over from Blair. Imagine if he had lost. In October 2008, George Osbourne would have been the one the world was looking to for guidance to avert the collapse of the Western Economy. God help us...
As for your comments on macro-economic policy - they are so fundamentalist that they would make a Taliban member seem like a CoE tea and cake old lass.
Every single major country in the world has used Keynesian policies over the last coupel of years to mitigate the effect of the recession. The alternative would have been a far, far deeper and more destructive recession. Your arguments about using a recession as a cold slap to economies are 30 years out of date. THAT is an arguable case when the problem is over-heating and inflation, like it was in the 70s and 80s. In THIS recession, the fundamentals of business and macro-economy were fine - the problem was that the credit system had collapsed. The answer to that was to underpin confidence, absolutely NOT to undermine it by saying, \"To the wall with you!\" If you had further weakened the situation by stripping back public spending or not underpinning the banking system (as Osbourne wanted to do in 2007-08), the results would have been catastrophic.
Finally, you clearly don't understand Quantitative Easing. This has nothing whatsoever to do with Government debt. It is a MONETARY policy, not a FISCAL one. In simple terms, it is printing more money, not borrowing it. It is used when there is a serious risk of deflation. What it does, in effect is to raise inflation. It has NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on fiscal debt. It was used by the Bank of England in this recession to prevent the economy from collapsing into an even bigger nose dive if inflation had gone seriously negative. There was a big lesson for this - Japan in the 1990s made every single wrong decision imaginable, and put a fundamentally strong economy into a downward deflationary spiral. They did this by following the same policies that Osbourne and Cameron suggested in 2007-08. Japan refused the introduction of QE for many years, and by the time it did use this policy, it has already had many years of stagant economic performance due to deflation.
Quantitative Easing did NOT, as you say in your Mail-speak, \"keep the boom going\". Firstly, there never WAS a boom under Brown - there was a decade of sensible, steady growth of 2-3% per annum, before the world wide crash (go loom at the figures - anyone can find them on the Internet). Secondly, QE only came in at the very depth of the recession. Exactly as it should do in any sensible economic policy when deflation is a serious threat. That is why it was used by the UK, the EU & the USA in 2008-09.