Printable View
true it is only a projection, but it is based on the published deficit reduction plans, what might things be like with McBroon still at the helm, with his cyclops vision myopically fixed somewhere other than the approaching iceberg!Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
and yet spending is rising in cash terms, which even in real terms will only be a ~5% cut by 2015.......Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
“Or maybe start defending your own nation and stop spending money on stupid things, oh, like the Royal wedding?” I’ll do that…
Um, totally unsubstantiated ad hominem?Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
"We" are not the dregs of society, nor are we (so far as I am aware) chauvanists.
The cupboard is bare, there is no money, we cannot increase spending. You just have to live with it. I work in Higher Education, I'm not exactly thrilled about the fees rises because I start teaching next year and, frankly, I'm worried about the effect the fees will have on the mentality of the students and how they will create unrealistic expectations we just can't meet.
Labour wasted a lot of money on pointless projects and bad ideas, raising the number of people going to university being a case in point. They also threatened to cut bu 20% going into the election, where the Coalition cut by 19% when actually in power.
So.... reactionary my foot. Fiscal responsibility is becoming the new orthodoxy, why it was ever anything else is beyond me.
hah! that's nothing, i have been called the following in this forum: "xenophobe and hyper-nationalist racist with militaristic, populist, and autarkic tendencies"Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
mostly by Louis... :beatnik2:
:clown:
“Fiscal responsibility is becoming the new orthodoxy,”
Is it? When the revenue from Speculation and Finances are less taxed than the ones from Production? When taxes on individual workers increase but the ones on Banks decrease?
I see here a clear ideological plan from the conserva-thieves.
They want the good old time without Unions and Daily Workers (re-labelled Self-Employed) was the rules.
It is not about deficit or budget balance.
It is about putting back the crowd at it place, right down in the gutters. And if they are nice, polite, eyes down and hat in hand when spoken to and good crowd then the Big Society and some Charities will give them some rewards but only to the deserving ones…
Naughty poor have to remember whose in charge.
...because Conservatives are evil and Liberals are good, yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Damn Conserv-thieves!
Replace with "foriegn-thieves" and not the intellectual bankruptcy.
Conservatives are not evil, Brenus, they are ordinary people, not a mixture of Darth Vader and Sauron.
Bah, this is all boring. When's the intervention starting? Rioting people, regime used the police and cracked down on its own people. So sad...
Every time Labour get into power they :daisy: up the economy. Then the other lot come along and have to clean up the mess. I got this very early on. As a working class guy I realised that the main victims of the Labour party are the poor and disadvantaged. I think they do it on purpose.
The Labour party are like a drunken uncle who love to throw money about, because they can.
The Torys are like a strict step-parent who come along after the partys over and make you clean up the mess you made.
Labour, the enemy of the poor and vulnerable. Still I 'spose each generation is bound to find out how evil and nasty the Labour party is. Anyone who votes for them needs their bumps feeling.
*and breathe*
"Every time Labour get into power they :daisy: up the economy."
It's their professional occupation, and they are skilled practitioners of the trade!
Yeah cos like labour engineered the global financial crisis innit blood.
As has frequently been said here and elsewhere, the crash merely stressed the system. Previously it was subsisting on cheap borrowing with no plans to pay the money back, but during a bubble no one thinks that it will ever end. Then the crash happened and countries with massive spending with no revenue have imploded or been bailed out, others are on their way.
Labour did not cause the crisis, but they managed to split oversight from the bank of England which certainly helped.
~:smoking:
as rory has already said; bad things happen, and Labour's epic hubris was to believe they had ended the cycle of boom-n-bust, therefore they could keep interests rates artificially low in perpetuity and engage in endless deficit spending.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
so no, they didn't cause the crisis, but they were responsible for failing to be able to cope with the economic crisis, events that will ALWAYS happen.
There was me thinking they were all for spending their way out of the crash, although you could of course argue that such an approach, followed by notably second rate economies like the US, is deeply wrong.
Don't get me started on Brown or the boom/bust hubris, but then neither have the Tories (Norman Lamont?) been exempt from such catastrophes...
Stop peddling the cluedo-like nonsense that it was labour "wot done it" in the library with a (public spending) hammer.
oh dear, where to start? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
Pitchforks.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I think we can do better than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
Who took financial control from the Bank of England and gave it to the FSA?
Who sold off the nations gold reserve when the price of gold was at it's lowest?
Who flagged up such a sale months before, thus depressing the market further?
Who decided to spend 25% more than was raised in tax receipts?
Who decided to raise the upper band of taxation to 50%, in spite of the fact that doing so would again lower tax revenue?
Who decided to knee the poorest in the balls by doubling their tax threshold?
How's that for starters?
It's about time the brits take the streets to show banksters and traders that things can't keep going that way.
What is really ridiculous though is the wave of "lolz those anarchists burnt stuff and get money from their daddies". Because obviously, all the protesters were
a - anarchists and rioters
b - spoiled kids.
Maybe if you keep singing it, you'll change reality.
I would disagree with that being wrong, often central banks can have a problem in that there supposed to watch systemic risk AND regulate the products they sell like mortgages etc etc. Sometimes central banks can forget the consumer interest in the defence of the overall banking interest, hiving off various types of regulation can be a good idea as then the central bank is purely about systemic risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Labour are, it would not be a terrible idea if we had spare money - we don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by al Roumi
They also recovered from it in time for Labour to take office. Also, 1992 was in large part a targeted "bet" by traders to force London to abandon the ERM (is that the thing, the one from Europe?)Quote:
Don't get me started on Brown or the boom/bust hubris, but then neither have the Tories (Norman Lamont?) been exempt from such catastrophes...
Stop peddling the "Tories are out to get you" nonsese first, it's silier (this goes to all posters.)Quote:
Stop peddling the cluedo-like nonsense that it was labour "wot done it" in the library with a (public spending) hammer.
“because Conservatives are evil and Liberals are good, yes?” They are the SAME. Don’t you see it?
”Replace with "foriegn-thieves" and not the intellectual bankruptcy.” What Foreign Thieves? The one who bought your Football Clubs, or your Super Markets?
”Conservatives are not evil, Brenus, they are ordinary people, not a mixture of Darth Vader and Sauron.”
I speak of politic not about people. Conservatives are probably nice in private life, educated and polite. I worked with some of them, and was always welcome in their home… But that is not the point. Their politic is to save their money and even to get more if possible. They have a genuine vision of society completed twisted by their Social Class. I had one of them explaining me that only the person trained (meaning them, of course) for power should have access to power as the illiterates have no clues about problems… Or the important persons should have priority for dentist or medical treatment, as their time is more valuable than the one of the workers…
And can I remind you that Dark Vador at the start thinks he can use the Force for the better good in killing the badies before it goes wrong. Saruman thinks he can fight the dark side from inside and with it own weapons, without seeing he will loose the reasons to fight the Dark Side.
I’ll give you Sauron is lost for Humanity…
Thanks to the blog from Flore Vasseur in the French weekly Mariane 2, I am able to understand why they are none millionaire supporting Tories
They are parts of a branch of the human species known as the Homo-Valetus (from the French passed in English Valet) or Homo-Larbinus (from the French Larbin).
He imagines he shares the values of the class who exploits him because he lives in the same environment. He is sure he is in the right side of the barricade. He is for taxes exemption even if he will never benefit of it, as he is not rich enough. Like a slave protecting his master with his body against the attacks of his class, the Homo-Valetus identifies himself with his master in order to reach a acceptable mental balance that will allowed him to live in accepting his subordination.
In a perfectly accepted mental defence, the Homo-Valetus become even more certain and he suffers from a pathologic behaviour that leads him to systematically defend the wealthiest classes against the class he comes from. The Homo-Larbinus has no political conscience. He works with the ones who exploit him to bring on him their kindness and, hopefully, rewards.
For the French speaking, youtube “Le syndome du Larbin”, by Juliendusud2, funny…
The reality is that prisoners have complained when the que for the dentist increased to 6 weeks. I know, it is terribly unfair that convicted criminals should have to wait for treatment.
I do agree that for power to be solely concentrated in those who feel it is their destiny to be leaders is bad - and the only thing worse is to give anything resembling power to those like Prescott who exist only to grab as much as they can at the expense of everything else.
Most wealthy have private health insurance so there is no real problem with them getting treated first. They pay for the NHS and then choose not to use it. My old consultant said that our job as doctors was to advocate those who no one else would be an advocate for. So, others pay and others have to then favour them in hospitel at the expense of others as well.
And the reality is that if someone works for £80k a year and can not work, their earnings and indeed the taxes accrued will be lower. So there is less money for everyone. Same goes for fixing a plumber's hands as it is better for all if s/he was working rather than wating for treatment. I am sure we could spend all money on drug and alcohol rehab facilities but the return on investment would be appalling; replacing every elderly person's hip as a priority would mean that there would be a lot less money for others as an individual's quality of life can not be taxed.
~:smoking:
agreed. it was, quite simply, labour who spent the economy into a corner from which we could not escape when 'stuff' happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
That's a pretty big generalisation. Even with those types of Conservatives (I am more than happy to admit they exist) you have completely missed the point. The Conservative elitist is a Patrician, not a Capitalist, he gains power so that he might better serve his country - the connection with money is completely false, the sort of person you are talking about has his wealth in land and he has tenants to protect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
What you are doing is conflating Thatcherism and Toryism, they are not the same thing. Thatcher was a complete aberation in terms of Conservativism, she completely rejected the concept of shared civic responsibility in the community!
I only resent all the labour bashing when it's so apparently blind to the failings of other parties, particularly the Tories. All your mud slinging requires is an armoury of elephantine memories and then it'll be like the Somme.
And this is spin, you know it but it suits you because you like the ideology. It's the Tory facade to cover for cuts which need not be as harsh as they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
i prefer to think of it as reality, whatever.
While your right about the differ between Thatcherism and Toryism I would say that any return to Toryism is a dead end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
The main economic pre-occupation of a Tory would be to maintain value of various assets, in order to do this interest rates must and would have to be high to ensure these valuations, that is not going to be done anytime soon.
I wonder if the fact that I'm writing articles for my university's Labour Club journal (Look Left) and busy climbing the hierarchy increases or reduces my authority to comment in this thread.
Concentrate on the phrases "lessons learned", "moving foward", "listening to the voters" and of course "investing in our future". For the love of god don't get bogged down in detail or finances. Concentrate on climbing the greasy pole of shut in election lists and try to get over the massive setback you'll have if you've not done PPE at Oxford - parties of the people don't need to be from the people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
~:smoking:
Mhm, nothing like a detailed analysis of stats to produce a dreary article! I'm going to be writing it on the monarchy actually, and specifically why Labour needs it.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Aha, I'm way ahead of you - that's what I'm currently reading :smash: That said, I'm far too insecurely Northern to forget my roots, so hopefully I won't turn out like the run of the mill slimy PPE tosser that exists in the public imagination (And not without good reason, I might add)Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
i'd be curious to read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
concentrate on these ruminations of these people:Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Lord Glasman
D Miliband
Jon Cruddas and Jonathan Rutherford
Why?
John McTernan
Anything else is electoral suicide!Quote:
Alexander lucidly exposed the Coalition’s hidden strategy to reshape British politics. Over time, he argued, Nick Clegg and his Lib Dem colleagues will prosecute the argument that they are the only effective vehicle to deliver Centre-left policies. The wins they have over the Tories will be the evidence. At the same time David Cameron will aim to cement his hold on the Centre-right vote. Their shared objective? Marginalising the Labour Party.