Gringo Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 think its a case of the devil you know rather than the one you dont.but then how did the devil we didn't know get elected and become the devil we do know :? :-)Because back in 1997, people were saying things likemore importantly I wouldn't trust the dummkopf who put us in this mess referring to the bloke who as chancellor and then PM oversaw the financial crisis over the ERM, 15% interest rates, black wednesday and the routing of sterling. The defence of the incumbents was you couldn't trust the public schoolboys with no experience on the opposite benches who were good at presentation and little else. The then incumbents also felt hard done by in that the opposition had supported the march into the ERM but only they were getting the backlash from the voters, whilst the current opposition would have done little different in terms of regulation to the current incumbents. 13 years on, the only thing that has changed is the colour of the tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 There is no quick fix and both cuts and tax rises will be needed with taxes going up siginifcantly in a few years time. There is no recovery at the moment, it's an illusion that is likely to be rudely shattered post election, but at the moment no political party is prepared to scare the horses by telling it how it actually is (imo).But AWOL, Liam Byrne just said read my lips - no new taxes under a labour govtso it can't be that bad, lol. Obviously the are trying to create a contrast between themselves and the tories when in the background both are planning for vat rises and massive cuts, the current dancing around the issues is purely election banter - you wouldn't expect either set to be honest at such a time. Well you might expect it, but you won't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wol. Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 The winners will be who ever employs Simon Cowell ? So who ever he goes for I will go for the others, just so I can say I didn't vote the feckers in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Conservative for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 referring to the bloke who as chancellor and then PM oversaw the financial crisis over the ERM, 15% interest rates, black wednesday and the routing of sterling. You do know what happened afterwards though don't you ? The economy came out strong and a certain party came to power and inherited a strong economy in a boom period they happily took all the credit whilst not actually making long term provisions and now apologist on the interweb want to blame it all on Thatcher oh and you do also know that Brown backed the Tories on black wedsnesday and it cost him the leadership as it was felt he shouldn't have told the truth but attacked the Tories no matter what Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 But AWOL, Liam Byrne just said read my lips - no new taxes under a labour govtso it can't be that bad, lol. Was that before or after he said that they needed to cut public spending by £38,000 million? All to come from 'efficiency savings', obviously, and that level depending on 'growth' being responsible for £25,000 million of the reduction in the deficit. One question about this red cuts v blue cuts, what do people seriously want (to happen) and think will happen to our economy in the future? Do they really think that we can just wind the clock back a few years and toddle on as though nought had happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 The economy came out strong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted March 13, 2010 Author Share Posted March 13, 2010 referring to the bloke who as chancellor and then PM oversaw the financial crisis over the ERM, 15% interest rates, black wednesday and the routing of sterling. You do know what happened afterwards though don't you ?By then trust was gone and the blame fairly in place - you could say that major was just lucky to get his cock up in early in the parliament term, giving him time to recover. Of course brown would need at least another term to turn this one around. oh and you do also know that Brown backed the Tories on black wedsnesdayI think it might have been mentioned The then incumbents also felt hard done by in that the opposition had supported the march into the ERM but only they were getting the backlash from the voters, whilst the current opposition would have done little different in terms of regulation to the current incumbents. and it cost him the leadership as I was felt he shouldn't have told the truth buy attacked the Tories no matter whatIt cost him the leadership for the same reason it cost the tories power - it was rather a large error of judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 One question about this red cuts v blue cuts, what do people seriously want and think will happen to our economy in the future? Do they really think that we can just wind the clock back a few years and toddle on as though nought had happened? No mate, although that hasn't been digested fully yet imo. There is a shift in international capital (and therefore influence) taking place from West to East that cannot possibly be reversed. The net result will be a permament reduction - by how much I wouldn't like to guess - in relative living standards in the UK compared to what we have been used to. Places like Singapore, KL, Mumbai and maybe Qatar and a few places in the Middle East will be the London/Frankfurt/New York of the future. When the dust settles in 10-15 years the world will look like a very different place and it will be interesting to see what happens when the real power lies with countries that are not exactly attached to our democratic values. Not very cheerful from our perspective but I think it's realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 One question about this red cuts v blue cuts, what do people seriously want and think will happen to our economy in the future? Do they really think that we can just wind the clock back a few years and toddle on as though nought had happened? No mate, although that hasn't been digested fully yet imo. There is a shift in international capital (and therefore influence) taking place from West to East that cannot possibly be reversed. The net result will be a permament reduction - by how much I wouldn't like to guess - in relative living standards in the UK compared to what we have been used to. Places like Singapore, KL, Mumbai and maybe Qatar and a few places in the Middle East will be the London/Frankfurt/New York of the future. When the dust settles in 10-15 years the world will look like a very different place and it will be interesting to see what happens when the real power lies with countries that are not exactly attached to our democratic values. Not very cheerful from our perspective but I think it's realistic. I probably wouldn't disagree with much of that, though I would add in the growing consumer economies of China, India and South America (whilst not discounting the US totally :winkold:). What that leads me to, though, is the prospect of 'austerity' regarding public finances in westen countries (mainly western European countries). What are we trying to get out of this? I think people regard all of that as necessary to take things back to where they were but I don't see that as likely (or even possible let alone desirable) and that is why I feel that, as usual with economic policy leading public policy, we are devising policies to fight last year's fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troglodyte Posted March 13, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 13, 2010 I'm not sure just yet, but I'm leaning towards Green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted March 14, 2010 Author Share Posted March 14, 2010 After reading Rawnsley in today's observer I think I would give my vote to the lib dems. A hung govt is the only obvious way of forcing the two statist parties into trying to create something resembling a democracy as opposed to the shamocracy that currently deals with public opinion on how they should be governed. On a side note, nice to see the tories being as duplicitous as ever. Debt campaigners have reacted in fury and disbelief to the killing of the bill and Labour MP Sally Keeble, one of the bill's backers, has accused the Conservatives of "duplicity" by pretending to back the legislation and then sabotaging it at the last minute. Campaigners are now calling on the leader of the opposition to clarify his view of the bill and asking whether the MP concerned will be identified. The international development secretary, Douglas Alexander, has sent a letter to Cameron demanding an explanation. The frustration has been compounded by the secrecy surrounding the events in the Commons last night. During the reading, three Tory MPs were seen to huddle together on the benches before one shouted the word "object!", which under parliamentary procedure effectively stopped the bill passing. Three Conservatives were in the chamber – Christopher Chope, Andrew Robathan and Simon Burns – but none has admitted intervening. The Tory treasury spokesman, David Gauke, who was on the committee that debated the bill, insisted the Conservatives had wanted to see it go through and that the MPs, two of whom are Tory whips, did not have the support of the frontbench. He said he did not know which one had made the objection. "We have our suspicions," he added. "It is a pity. Our view was let's go with the bill but that was not to be. Everyone recognises that this was a rushed process." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 problem I have with parties other than Labour and Conservatives is that some of their policies are really good and have potential and are more forward thinking in their approach to specific areas of government than perhaps the main parties are, but some policies are just ridiculous and would require bankrupting the country to fund them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 ... some policies are just ridiculous and would require bankrupting the country to fund them. Which policies are you thinking of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparey16 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 can anyone give me a quick few sentence summery of Labour/Conversation parties for the upcoming election, first time voting and never really took any interest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 15, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 15, 2010 can anyone give me a quick few sentence summery of Labour/Conversation parties for the upcoming election, first time voting and never really took any interest Effectively the same entity, one wears red the other blue. New Labour (the New bit is important) has been in power since 1997 and hasn't been an atrocious failure but neither has it done much to sing the praises of and it's done a lot thats worth derision. Sent us into Iraq, monetary policy has left us, along with the rest of the world, a bit buggered. Should be the party of the common man, but actually has courted big business more. Spent a lot on public services and imo made them better but also brought with that more problems. Tories - The party of the man with money traditionally, nothing's changed. Policies appear to be telling you repeatedly that Labour are shit. Expect cuts on spending (something equally applicable to the party in red to be frank). smug PR front man in Cameron who, in my case at least, whenever he speaks brings forth a quiet echo of the famous words of the Iron Lady...No no no! That lady's not for turning Basically, they're the same party and the Tories will win because they aren't Labour. Something they're perfectly aware of since their policies seem to amount to 'We aren't Labour'. Vote Lib Dem or better, spoil the ballot. (I fully expect to be held up on something about either party I've said... Frankly I'm suprised I did as well as I have to avoid derision for them all). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparey16 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 whats the general jist of the lib dem then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 ... some policies are just ridiculous and would require bankrupting the country to fund them. Which policies are you thinking of? Green policy on Drugs I believe to be quite sensible, similar to the dutch model, but more support through NHS for hard drug addicts (e.g. Heroine addicts) Their Energy policy is good in principle but would either not be different to what is being done already, OR will need a HUGE sum of money to get it done in a relatively quick time (30 years or so). They want pretty much 100% renewable energy, which can't be done, not until technology in renewables significantly makes them more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 15, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 15, 2010 Effectively the same entity, one wears red the other blue. New Labour (the New bit is important) has been in power since 1997 and hasn't been an atrocious failure but neither has it done much to sing the praises of and it's done a lot thats worth derision. Sent us into Iraq, monetary policy has left us, along with the rest of the world, a bit buggered. Should be the party of the common man, but actually has courted big business more. Spent a lot on public services and imo made them better but also brought with that more problems. All that and the control freakery / big brother / invasion of civil liberties shit that both Brown and Bliar have implemented (and tried to extend further and failed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 whats the general jist of the lib dem then? They wish to abolish student fees (albeit eventually, starting with those in final year) /thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts