|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 28, 2015 18:15:21 GMT
It started in 2007, they were in charge for 10 years before that, coming into office with a sound economy, decimatated manufacturing, sold off the gold reserves needed for a rainy day, increased the government part of the debt to pay for all the quangos, trusted an economy based on unstable banks and capital projects, crippled us with PFI's for years and years, planned and allowed the country to get swamped with immigrants (more labour voters), took us into illegal wars, Blair the only serving prime minister to be interviewed by police, didn't save for the bad times, etc etc. apart from that, well done Blair and Brown The affects of some or all of those are debatable. However, the affects of Cameron's are less so. Mostly because other than cut/cut/cut from those less able to afford it, he's done the grand sum of jack$#!t Blair / Browns tax increases hit every working household in the UK . Browns attack on pension funds virtually ended final salary pension schemes for everybody . How was this any different
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 28, 2015 18:41:09 GMT
The affects of some or all of those are debatable. However, the affects of Cameron's are less so. Mostly because other than cut/cut/cut from those less able to afford it, he's done the grand sum of jack$#!t Blair / Browns tax increases hit every working household in the UK . Browns attack on pension funds virtually ended final salary pension schemes for everybody . How was this any different Must be the 0% growth Gordon proudly announced in the house clouding his memory.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 18:44:02 GMT
I think you need to watch the video . If after watching it you come to the same conclusion then there are a number of consultant psychiatrists I can recommend. Boris is a complete idiot . I would rather vote UKIP than cast my vote in his direction. As for short memories ....we had a decade of growth under the last government . You need treating for amnesia . Gouranga . A decade of growth, but they were in for 13 years You say growth but they came into office with surplus in the bank, which is a good way to start, and left us with the biggest ever peacetime debt. Unfortunately they increased government debt (different to overall debt) based on an unstable boom instead of saving for a rainy day, as well as selling off the gold reserves at the lowest price possible. The government debt was probably to offset the massive loss in manufacturing, something you didn't respond to a couple of weeks ago when the figures were put forward ... Actually the current lot have left us with the biggest ever peacetime debt, £1.5 trillion, approximately double what it was when they started and that is without having to cope with an unforeseen financial crisis and associated recession. Quite some achievement to double debt at the same time as reducing the deficit (but not eliminating it as promised) and cutting services. Great job! (Incidentally, given the trouble some folk on here have with separating the causes of debt and deficit, you wonder how they're coping with an increasing debt while the deficit drops, given that the two are apparently so inextricably linked!) You bang on about the gold reserves yet ignore the sell off of the Royal Mail which cost the country more. You bang on about PFI and ignore the fact Osborne is doing exactly the same. Talk about seeing only what you want!
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 28, 2015 19:13:32 GMT
It started in 2007, they were in charge for 10 years before that, coming into office with a sound economy, decimatated manufacturing, sold off the gold reserves needed for a rainy day, increased the government part of the debt to pay for all the quangos, trusted an economy based on unstable banks and capital projects, crippled us with PFI's for years and years, planned and allowed the country to get swamped with immigrants (more labour voters), took us into illegal wars, Blair the only serving prime minister to be interviewed by police, didn't save for the bad times, etc etc. apart from that, well done Blair and Brown How do you define "A legal War" An unholy pact with France to protect Poland I suppose =) Labour had and still have massive flaws in their ranks, however they do have one thing the Tories will never have and that is thought for people less well off than themselves. It's basically a word not found in a rich man's phrase book , it's called Sharing. Is it the 4th largest income in the world we have but still we have soup kitchens and people starving to death. SHAME on the selfish lot of them SCUM of the earth. Labours faults and their ineptitude with economics and immigration are why I can no longer vote for them, but to even contemplate voting for the Butchers of the Tory party is beyond belief imo. When you watch a friend die in poverty you will understand. One that is agreed with the United Nations who we are members of? I wasn't asking about who you were voting for, that should be private
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 28, 2015 19:30:07 GMT
A decade of growth, but they were in for 13 years You say growth but they came into office with surplus in the bank, which is a good way to start, and left us with the biggest ever peacetime debt. Unfortunately they increased government debt (different to overall debt) based on an unstable boom instead of saving for a rainy day, as well as selling off the gold reserves at the lowest price possible. The government debt was probably to offset the massive loss in manufacturing, something you didn't respond to a couple of weeks ago when the figures were put forward ... Actually the current lot have left us with the biggest ever peacetime debt, £1.5 trillion, approximately double what it was when they started and that is without having to cope with an unforeseen financial crisis and associated recession. Facts eh, awkward buggers! Quite some achievement to double debt at the same time as reducing the deficit (but not eliminating it as promised) and cutting services. Great job! You bang on about the gold reserves yet ignore the sell off of the Royal Mail which cost the country more. You bang on about PFI and ignore the fact Osborne is doing exactly the same. Talk about seeing only what you want! The Royal mail sell off brought in £3.3billion, a probable under valuation of £1bn, but it brought in £3.3bn how did it cost the country more? the gold sell off lost £7bn on it's price, a bit of a difference. The current debt is not from zero though is it, half of what it is was inherited in 2010, as I've said before, starting with a surplus and a healthy economy is a lot better than starting with a massive debt and the biggest recession going, surely that's not hard to understand? And for the coalition to do what they have with the economy is far better than what most people forecast in 2010 isn't it? Yes the coalition are doing PFI's but in a sensible manner, Blair and Brown saddled the NHS for years to come with this debt, read it and weep, www.newstatesman.com/staggers/2014/07/save-nhs-labour-must-face-ugly-truth-pfiAs you say, talk about seeing only what you say
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 20:02:47 GMT
Or approximately £6bn for RM if you believe some reports! Simialrly, where does this £7bn gold figure come from? Why not use the current gold price and say Brown lost us about £15bn? Similarly, why not lambast Cameron for not selling the rest of our gold when it was about 25% higher in price four years ago than it is now! Imagine how much that oversight has cost us! The debt wasn't at zero in 1997 either ya daft old sod . I picked up on your 'biggest ever debt' claim to show that it means nothing really because the debt has gone up almost every year for the last hundred years or so. But especially and increasingly so since we turned our back on the post-war economic consensus round about 1970 and embraced monetarism. Ironic isn't it that we find ourselves so lumbered with debt when both parties finally accepted the rightwing free market approach to economic policy! No, what the coalition have done is not much better than most people forecast, not least when considered against their own forecasts. Lest we forget, we were promised the deficit would be gone by now. It's still two thirds there! It took three years of flatlining before the economy picked up and now it's slowing down again. That's why two thirds of the deficit is still there. I can guarantee you if the Labour Party had been in power for the last five years and failed to clear the deficit as promised you would be screaming blue murder about their uselessness rather than claiming they'd done better than expected! That's what I mean when I say you see what you want. Osborne is signing up to £2.4bn worth of PFI contracts every year on average - that's a sensible use of PFI is it? I see. What you're saying is there's good PFI and bad PFI, good when it's done by the Tories, bad when it's done by Labour? I think I get where you're coming from!
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Apr 28, 2015 20:20:21 GMT
Yes we were promised the debt would be gone but by 2017 I think, but considering the EU and the states carried on with a recession we have done very well.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 28, 2015 21:09:21 GMT
Yes we were promised the debt would be gone but by 2017 I think, but considering the EU and the states carried on with a recession we have done very well. It was the deficit not the debt that was promised to be gone by 2017, the deficit that runs at 100 billion a year +, of course Luke believes tax receipts don't affect the debt and nor does the deficit, so it must be magic beans the government pays staff in otherwise i'm not sure how spending 100 billion+ more than you get in tax receipts could be paid for as we're assured it's definitely not through borrowing unless of course Luke is wrong. This of course also explains why he doesn't get debt going up even when the deficit is coming down.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Apr 29, 2015 7:44:07 GMT
Or approximately £6bn for RM if you believe some reports! Simialrly, where does this £7bn gold figure come from? Why not use the current gold price and say Brown lost us about £15bn? Similarly, why not lambast Cameron for not selling the rest of our gold when it was about 25% higher in price four years ago than it is now! Imagine how much that oversight has cost us! The debt wasn't at zero in 1997 either ya daft old sod . I picked up on your 'biggest ever debt' claim to show that it means nothing really because the debt has gone up almost every year for the last hundred years or so. But especially and increasingly so since we turned our back on the post-war economic consensus round about 1970 and embraced monetarism. Ironic isn't it that we find ourselves so lumbered with debt when both parties finally accepted the rightwing free market approach to economic policy! No, what the coalition have done is not much better than most people forecast, not least when considered against their own forecasts. Lest we forget, we were promised the deficit would be gone by now. It's still two thirds there! It took three years of flatlining before the economy picked up and now it's slowing down again. That's why two thirds of the deficit is still there. I can guarantee you if the Labour Party had been in power for the last five years and failed to clear the deficit as promised you would be screaming blue murder about their uselessness rather than claiming they'd done better than expected! That's what I mean when I say you see what you want. Osborne is signing up to £2.4bn worth of PFI contracts every year on average - that's a sensible use of PFI is it? I see. What you're saying is there's good PFI and bad PFI, good when it's done by the Tories, bad when it's done by Labour? I think I get where you're coming from! Correct, the debt wasn't at zero in 1997... it was the deficit that was falling and by adopting Tory spending plans we had a surplus pretty soon after. Once they were done, Labour then handed over a whopping deficit and it was common knowledge that the affects would be felt for a long, long time. The main difference that the Tories faced to what Labour would have had to cope with is that Labour wouldn't have had to put up with an opposition that would do everything they possibly could to fight the cuts and the re-balancing. Still, all is ok now. Taking advice from Brand will have Miliband solving all ills.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 8:10:21 GMT
Or approximately £6bn for RM if you believe some reports! Simialrly, where does this £7bn gold figure come from? Why not use the current gold price and say Brown lost us about £15bn? Similarly, why not lambast Cameron for not selling the rest of our gold when it was about 25% higher in price four years ago than it is now! Imagine how much that oversight has cost us! The debt wasn't at zero in 1997 either ya daft old sod . I picked up on your 'biggest ever debt' claim to show that it means nothing really because the debt has gone up almost every year for the last hundred years or so. But especially and increasingly so since we turned our back on the post-war economic consensus round about 1970 and embraced monetarism. Ironic isn't it that we find ourselves so lumbered with debt when both parties finally accepted the rightwing free market approach to economic policy! No, what the coalition have done is not much better than most people forecast, not least when considered against their own forecasts. Lest we forget, we were promised the deficit would be gone by now. It's still two thirds there! It took three years of flatlining before the economy picked up and now it's slowing down again. That's why two thirds of the deficit is still there. I can guarantee you if the Labour Party had been in power for the last five years and failed to clear the deficit as promised you would be screaming blue murder about their uselessness rather than claiming they'd done better than expected! That's what I mean when I say you see what you want. Osborne is signing up to £2.4bn worth of PFI contracts every year on average - that's a sensible use of PFI is it? I see. What you're saying is there's good PFI and bad PFI, good when it's done by the Tories, bad when it's done by Labour? I think I get where you're coming from! Correct, the debt wasn't at zero in 1997... it was the deficit that was falling and by adopting Tory spending plans we had a surplus pretty soon after. Once they were done, Labour then handed over a whopping deficit and it was common knowledge that the affects would be felt for a long, long time. The main difference that the Tories faced to what Labour would have had to cope with is that Labour wouldn't have had to put up with an opposition that would do everything they possibly could to fight the cuts and the re-balancing. Still, all is ok now. Taking advice from Brand will have Miliband solving all ills. Why do people insist on framing things in a way to suit their own agenda by talking absolute bollocks. Milliband isn't taking advice from Brand, he's using the platform of Brand's Trews to put forward his arguments in an attempt to gain more votes. It's that simple anything else said about it is made-up bullshit. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/28/ed-miliband-russell-brand-labour-young-people-politics
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 8:45:16 GMT
Miliband should take my advice ....Fuck off as leader and take that damp wet useless wanker called Brand with you .
Syria preferably .
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Apr 29, 2015 12:00:14 GMT
Correct, the debt wasn't at zero in 1997... it was the deficit that was falling and by adopting Tory spending plans we had a surplus pretty soon after. Once they were done, Labour then handed over a whopping deficit and it was common knowledge that the affects would be felt for a long, long time. The main difference that the Tories faced to what Labour would have had to cope with is that Labour wouldn't have had to put up with an opposition that would do everything they possibly could to fight the cuts and the re-balancing. Still, all is ok now. Taking advice from Brand will have Miliband solving all ills. Why do people insist on framing things in a way to suit their own agenda by talking absolute bollocks. Milliband isn't taking advice from Brand, he's using the platform of Brand's Trews to put forward his arguments in an attempt to gain more votes. It's that simple anything else said about it is made-up bullshit. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/28/ed-miliband-russell-brand-labour-young-people-politicsBrilliant. He's spent 5 years telling us all how he's the moral compass for us all and then gets into bed with a wanker like Brand in a bed to gain votes just days before the election. It could prove to be a masterstroke to engage the youth or it could totally go against him when people that follow politics think 'what the fuck' in terms of votes. Get desperate and ditch the morals that you never really had. At least the tosser has shown his true colours once more.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 16:19:03 GMT
Brilliant. He's spent 5 years telling us all how he's the moral compass for us all and then gets into bed with a wanker like Brand in a bed to gain votes just days before the election. It could prove to be a masterstroke to engage the youth or it could totally go against him when people that follow politics think 'what the fuck' in terms of votes. Get desperate and ditch the morals that you never really had. At least the tosser has shown his true colours once more. I've got absolutely no problem with people who disagree with Brand's views, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and make up their own minds and I'm always more than happy to have an open debate where both sides can put things forward without the need to resort to petty insults. What I've got absolutley no time for is the sneering, intolerant attitudes that are displayed by the likes of yourself and mumf. It's embarassing.
|
|
|
Post by mcf on Apr 29, 2015 20:28:10 GMT
Brilliant. He's spent 5 years telling us all how he's the moral compass for us all and then gets into bed with a wanker like Brand in a bed to gain votes just days before the election. It could prove to be a masterstroke to engage the youth or it could totally go against him when people that follow politics think 'what the fuck' in terms of votes. Get desperate and ditch the morals that you never really had. At least the tosser has shown his true colours once more. I've got absolutely no problem with people who disagree with Brand's views, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and make up their own minds and I'm always more than happy to have an open debate where both sides can put things forward without the need to resort to petty insults. What I've got absolutley no time for is the sneering, intolerant attitudes that are displayed by the likes of yourself and mumf. It's embarassing. What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 20:54:21 GMT
I've got absolutely no problem with people who disagree with Brand's views, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and make up their own minds and I'm always more than happy to have an open debate where both sides can put things forward without the need to resort to petty insults. What I've got absolutley no time for is the sneering, intolerant attitudes that are displayed by the likes of yourself and mumf. It's embarassing. What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats. I wouldn't piss on Brand even if he was on fire. Hes a complete and utter talentless piece of utter shit and if Milliband thinks he's going to win support pulling stunts by talking to Brand then he's sadly mistaken. Brand is a hypocritical twat of the highest order.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 21:16:52 GMT
I've got absolutely no problem with people who disagree with Brand's views, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and make up their own minds and I'm always more than happy to have an open debate where both sides can put things forward without the need to resort to petty insults. What I've got absolutley no time for is the sneering, intolerant attitudes that are displayed by the likes of yourself and mumf. It's embarassing. What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats. You don't half spout some hyperbolic nonsense. They've both got to where they have in life because plenty of people like them, you might not like them and you're entitled to do so but it seems like a fair proportion of the British public disagree with you. You can bang on about Brand's past all you like but he's clearly turned himself around and that is something to be praised. If Rupert Murdoch and his mates doesn't like them it means they're both doing something right.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 21:23:02 GMT
What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats. I wouldn't piss on Brand even if he was on fire. Hes a complete and utter talentless piece of utter shit and if Milliband thinks he's going to win support pulling stunts by talking to Brand then he's sadly mistaken. Brand is a hypocritical twat of the highest order. For holding an opinion that is different to yours? For having made mistakes in the past? For changing his opinions over time like most people do? Like it or not Brand does have an influence on a largely disillusioned youth, you might not agree with him but there are plenty of people that do. You're even worse than MCF for spouting hyperbolic nonsense, you come across as a vile human being.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 21:29:29 GMT
I wouldn't piss on Brand even if he was on fire. Hes a complete and utter talentless piece of utter shit and if Milliband thinks he's going to win support pulling stunts by talking to Brand then he's sadly mistaken. Brand is a hypocritical twat of the highest order. For holding an opinion that is different to yours? For having made mistakes in the past? For changing his opinions over time like most people do? You're even worse than MCF for spouting hyperbolic nonsense, you come across as a vile human being. Good.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 21:37:54 GMT
For holding an opinion that is different to yours? For having made mistakes in the past? For changing his opinions over time like most people do? You're even worse than MCF for spouting hyperbolic nonsense, you come across as a vile human being. Good. You actually sound mentally ill. I can understand people disagreeing with him and not particularly liking him but to say you wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire is an absolute disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 29, 2015 21:38:38 GMT
I've got absolutely no problem with people who disagree with Brand's views, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and make up their own minds and I'm always more than happy to have an open debate where both sides can put things forward without the need to resort to petty insults. What I've got absolutley no time for is the sneering, intolerant attitudes that are displayed by the likes of yourself and mumf. It's embarassing. What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats. Personally i'm really interested in hearing what the millionaire tax avoiding MP who has never had a real job outside politics had to say to a crap multi-millionaire tax avoiding actor and comedian at his 2 million pound house before returning to his own 3 million pound house, I mean if these guys don't understand what ordinary people need who can.....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 21:39:33 GMT
Yes ....I am mentally ill so make sure you lock and bolt the doors before you go to bed .
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Apr 29, 2015 21:40:19 GMT
You actually sound mentally ill. I can understand people disagreeing with him and not particularly liking him but to say you wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire is an absolute disgrace. What do you want him to say if he dislikes the guy that much. I wouldnt give him my last Rolo
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 21:44:29 GMT
You actually sound mentally ill. I can understand people disagreeing with him and not particularly liking him but to say you wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire is an absolute disgrace. What do you want him to say if he dislikes the guy that much. I wouldnt give him my last Rolo Ha ha ha .....Yes. What a plank.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 21:46:44 GMT
What's embarrassing is that you want normal people to give the time of day to hypocritical wankstains like Brand and Miliband. Some of things that Brand has done are disgrace. It's nothing to do with sneering or intoleranance but merely a hatred for totally useless, hypocritical, moronic twats. Personally i'm really interested in hearing what the millionaire tax avoiding MP who has never had a real job outside politics had to say to a crap multi-millionaire tax avoiding actor and comedian at his 2 million pound house before returning to his own 3 million pound house, I mean if these guys don't understand what ordinary people need who can..... Laughable. It would be nice to see a working class man in charge of a major political party, however at the time he was made leader and ever since enough people must think Milliband is the right man for the job. If he wasn't he wouldn't be leader it's that simple. Do you want to go ahead and show me the evidence for tax avoiding? As for Brand he's clearly not to your personal taste, but the fact that he's got to where he has in life indicates that there must be a lot of people out there who like him.
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 21:51:04 GMT
What do you want him to say if he dislikes the guy that much. I wouldnt give him my last Rolo Ha ha ha .....Yes. What a plank. It's the irrational, venom spewing hatred that there's just no need for.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 22:04:15 GMT
Well watch the magic roundabout instead then ...
|
|
|
Post by edgepotter on Apr 29, 2015 22:06:28 GMT
Well watch the magic roundabout instead then ... Nah I'll just ignore you instead.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 22:06:51 GMT
Well watch the magic roundabout instead then ... Ah yes ! What a gal that Florence is !
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 22:08:02 GMT
Well watch the magic roundabout instead then ... Nah I'll just ignore you instead. Many do ....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 22:11:02 GMT
Well watch the magic roundabout instead then ... Nah I'll just ignore you instead.
|
|