Gordon Brown Resigns

[Barmby Rover]

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.

[MrFrost]

Doom and gloom. It won't happen.

[jucyberry]

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.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

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.

[bobjimwilly]

Just seen a status update on Facebook that sums up the new coalition - Con-Dems!

 

[MrFrost]

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.

[Nudga]

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.

[bobjimwilly]

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.\"

[bobjimwilly]

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???

[MrFrost]

And where are these guaranteed job placements going to be? It's all irrelevant anyway. Labour aren't in power. Accept it.

[bobjimwilly]

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.  

[BobG]

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

[Filo]

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!

[grayx]

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.

[MrFrost]

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]

[danrover82]

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!

[RobTheRover]

This is what we have to look forward to......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKFTtYx2OHc&feature=player_embedded#!

[Filo]

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.  

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!

[BobG]

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

[MrFrost]

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.

[Filo]

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!

[Barmby Rover]

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

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

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?

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[Barmby Rover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[DadsleyRover]

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.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

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.

[MrFrost]

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.