Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

Everything is for sale in Tory Britain

On 31 Mar 2015 at 8:25am When sharks attack. wrote:
Everything is for sale today including our pension information and our health records.Already people are being pestered day and night with phone calls by unscrupulous companies who have got hold of personal information from government departments insurance providers and health providers.This is the future in our country as market forces and spiv economics dominate our political and economic life. The poor and the vulnerable are increasingly surrounded by circling sharks who scenting blood will not hesitate to strike.the Tory state no longer sees itself as protecting it`s citizens but instead delivers those in its care to the corporate predators whose interests it serves. It`s disgusting.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 9:34am Great White wrote:
Yep, thats about right Sharkie... you kepe think that way...
Of course, no mistakes were ever made under Labour were they... hmmm, now who was the fellow who let the Banks do their own thing, and let them get intot eh position where they coudl fleece loads of working people....what was the chaps name, it escapes me... Brine, Burne.. oh no, got it - Brown, Gordon Brown, thats the fellow...
On 31 Mar 2015 at 10:06am Captain Cutless wrote:
The Tories wanted even more bank deregulation at the time ,so you can keep your Tory hypocrisy to your self.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 11:17am Gordon wrote:
The Big Lie[s].: The huge increase in the deficit and the UK’s debt in 2009/10 was due to the Labour Government’s failures to:
• ‘fix the roof’ in the good times by running a surplus
• [as all major economies], regulate the financial sector tightly enough, despite the tories sound advice. Tory policy at the time was for even lighter regulation of the finance sector, including the borderline lunatic, complete deregulation of the mortgage market 'since the banks could manage the risks'. If implemented, the UK's Great Recession would have been deeper, the necessary bailout larger and the international economy denied the success of the Gordon Brown led G20 summit's co-ordinated international economic action
The LSE Growth Commission [Anyone who looks at the mix of academics, business leaders, economists and banking experts on the Commission will be unable to dismiss them as Labour stooges]examined the performance of the last Labour government and concluded:
• British economic performance was strong throughout the period of Labour government, and GDP per head grew faster in the UK than in France, Germany, Italy or Japan. –
• Productivity growth in terms of GDP per hour was second only to the US, and improvements in employment rates were better than in the US. –
• This success, they say, was NOT due to an unsustainable bubble in finance, property or public spending. From 1997-2007, finance contributed around 0.4% to a 2.8% productivity growth. –
• They also dispute the view that this was all due to Thatcherite reforms which were then accepted as a norm. Instead, they point to improvements delivered by Labour changes to competition policy, a major expansion in education – remember ‘education, education, education’ and – wait for it – immigration
o . - On education, they pointed out that by 2007 the UK was spending more on education as a proportion of GDP than Germany and the US, and the percentage of the relevant age group going to university was higher than in France or Germany. –
o Furthermore, they believe this had a positive impact in the fight to reduce crime and illegal immigration. –
• Crucially, they make clear the crash was an international phenomenon which cannot be blamed on Labour policies, and that Labour did not leave Britain more vulnerable once the crash occurred. - They say the structural element of the deficit was 1% of GDP in 2008 – it rose to 5% by 2010 because of the crisis in consequence of the fall in tax receipts. So the increase in the deficit was a consequence not a cause. - They praise the Labour government’s counter-cyclical policies post crash, pointing out that these went some way towards limiting the fall in output, and say Labour ministers were right to recapitalise the banks and maintain demand. –
• Where they are critical of Labour is in relation to skills, especially at the bottom end of the social and economic scale, and not doing enough to cut regional inequalities. But overall the picture is a good one, and totally at odds with the dominant ‘mess we inherited’ lie, uttered every time coalition ministers open their mouths.
• And even if they do not say so explicitly, it is pretty clear the Commission believes that on the big choice of the last election – retrenchment under Labour, or austerity under the Tories – that GB/Darling were right, and DC/Osborne wrong.
This is all relevant to the current debate. The only way to counter the Tory Big Lies is by fighting back with the truth, even if it means doing so belatedly, and at the risk of the Tories screeching ‘mess we inherited’ ever more loudly.

On 31 Mar 2015 at 12:33pm Cliffe Hanger wrote:
Good grief, When Sharks Attack. Have we got to put up with another 5+ weeks of your political cr*p on here? It's bad enough with the so-called professional politicians banging on at us every day. We don't need amateurs too ...
On 31 Mar 2015 at 12:37pm Paul Newman wrote:
This is an ancient blog post from Alistair Campbell he sees to have chopped our words and phrases from a report glossed and pasted together without actually knowing what the words mean as if they answered questions not asked of the authors .
For example
'From 1997-2007, finance contributed around 0.4% to a 2.8% productivity growth. – '
This is supposed to be refuting the idea that the growth of the Blair period was actually an overheated economy. I don`t think it was entirely although clearly there was housing bubble but productivity growth is not the same thing as growth at all and is presumably something Campbell yanked out of context sit sounded right.
Productivity growth is created by efficiency not by growth per se ....eh ?
He says the authors the fact that the improved performance of the Economy was entirely due to Thatcherite reforms. They do not dispute the central part the Thatcher and Major reforms played , they could hardly be taken seriously if they did
They are disputing that the commonly accepted narrative tells the whole, story.

..and so on
His final paragraph moves form a report to a Labour line of the which was that the deficit was caused by the crash ( a fact which no-one disputes ) presented as if this exonerated Labour form the charge of having misjudged the economic cycle ( which obviously they did )
Its the work of a skilled and cynical propagandist but was ignored at the time and is now redundant as the supposed austerity of which it complains did not happen and the Coalition ended up spending more than a Darling planned to.
The poster will not know this but the effect is to congratulate George Osborne on having taken the right line ...
I agree
On 31 Mar 2015 at 12:49pm Country Boy wrote:
These arguments are far too complicated for me. All I know is that I have got what I have got from hard work alone and do not wish any of it to be taken away or taxed by a Labour Government.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 1:21pm Monty Crispo. wrote:
There has been no austerity under Osborne?Boy oh boy,you Tories really are out of touch.So long it`s been bad to know you.You are going to loose,not by a lot but you will loose.Ta Ta.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 4:02pm Mark wrote:
Would Mr Newman accept that
Mrs Thatcher misjudged the economic cycle in the late 80s creating worse debt, or not?
On 31 Mar 2015 at 4:25pm Fairmeadow wrote:
As a parting gift to their wealthy friends, the Coalition had forced the Lake District National Park to sell off the prime bits of landscape they own to the highest bidder. Always a mistake to gift land to any public body in the expectation that you are thereby protecting it. Reminiscent of Gerald Askew gifting Bentley to East Sussex CC, and then his widow having to pay about £1M to buy it back and stop it being sold on for development. That was a despicable way for the County Council to act, and here we have a National Park up to the same tricks.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 4:36pm Country Boy wrote:
OK - so lets hear some credible answers on here from those left of centre as to how they would reduce the deficit?
On 31 Mar 2015 at 6:33pm Paul Newman wrote:
Have you got a link to that story Fairmeadow , sounds appalling.
Country Boy - The pretense that Labour have any intention of sticking to a prudent plan is already evaporating .Len McLuskey is kicking as are 30 or 40 of the Parliamentary Party. We already know the SNP are demanding more spending ( on Scotland of course ).
Even well intentioned Labour administrations never stick to spending plans,( the coalition found it impossible after alll). The terrible danger is that the Bond Markets will look at the fracturing political scene and cease to believe that the UK is a reliable revenue source .
This is not just a matter of the Debt ( which , lets say gets well above 100% of GDP ), its to do with stability , there are lots of countries with money who no-one would lend to ( Nigeria for example ). As the country breaks into sectional interests and starts to believe Greek Tales such as the one published above we veer towards a bond strike
When it happens, and no-one knows when it might, interest rates will go up overnight and we will be in a kind of trouble that makes the last few years look like nothing.
Of course the people who were responsible will be busy re -writing history again as they always do.

On 31 Mar 2015 at 7:01pm Rosa Luxembourg wrote:
The rich will pay more ,and so they should.

Check it out here »
On 31 Mar 2015 at 7:04pm thinker wrote:
just lovely to see your name Rosa - and yes so they should! A rose amongst thorns.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 7:48pm Country Boy wrote:
Paul Newman - can you please just allow someone to answer my question? Pleeeeeeease?
On 31 Mar 2015 at 8:39pm Mark wrote:
Lots could be done towards this Country boy just by reversing things the government has done that shift money upwards. Companies in the UK now pay tax at a lower rate than companies in the USA do. On top of this, the government has changed tax laws in a way that makes it much easier for companies to hide money abroad. This is why we hear about companies like Starbucks and Top Shop paying zero in tax year after year. The Conservatives are just in the pocket of big business. Not to be trusted.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 9:01pm Country Boy wrote:
Is that the answer Mark? Is it? Can you quote some numbers please in order to make your argument credible?
On 31 Mar 2015 at 9:19pm Arthur wrote:
Your quite right Mark things will be so much better under a Labour government.
Today I read in the paper that unemployment has fallen by 1.9m under the coalition. Outrageous, at this rate people will start not to reley on the state. Here's the thing, a MASSIVE 17% of that figure is on a 0 hour contract. An ounce of intellegence will tell you that these people would be better off on the dole being looked after by the state instead.
So what if only 298000 jobs were created in the last 5 years of the Labour government, that proves nothing, in those good days the state paid us hansomly to stay at home and watch telly all day, we didn't need to go to work.
On 31 Mar 2015 at 10:58pm Mark wrote:
Not really country boy. It was one law and the USA and UK are two countries. Hope that helps you.
On 1 Apr 2015 at 6:41am Mr Ed wrote:
No need to worry about facts and numbers Mark, I am running my whole election campaign without either of them. Like you I am just telling people what they want to hear and so far they are believing me even though the other side are backing everything they claim with hard solid facts.
On 1 Apr 2015 at 1:29pm Fairmeadow wrote:
The link to the Bentley story is here:

Check it out here »
On 1 Apr 2015 at 3:11pm bastian wrote:
Put up the minimum wage to £12 an hour so that ordinairy people can actually pay for their needs and fill the tax pot for their needs, get rid of zero hours contracts so that everyone has a decent wage to live on and contribute from, then hit the HUGE comapnies thta use tax havens with a bill for their use of our island as a shopping mall-then scrap Trident and put the money into hospitals. Small businesses will just have to try harder to succeed, and bigger businesses will have to pay up.
On 1 Apr 2015 at 9:09pm Ed Can Do wrote:
Or, when faced with a doubling of their wage bill, companies will double their prices to maintain their current level of profitability meaning everyone's purchasing power stays exactly static and we're back where we started.

Forcing companies to pay everyone a ton more in one move will lead to horrific price inflation, that's how economics works I'm afraid bastian.

Far better as a plan would be to drastically improve education in this country, produce a generation or two of skilled workers and attract foreign business to the country who want to take advantage of our highly skilled workforce. All the time we have such comically low expectations of our schools and are churning out barely literate, unemployable kids by the bucket load we will struggle as a nation, increasingly left behind by countries that value education and skills training.
On 2 Apr 2015 at 11:17am bastian wrote:
ed-I do understand econimics, it is just so irritatingly weighted in favour of the company in our modern world. We have a highly educated youth, but the pay for the jobs at starting level are not exaclty attractive are they. There needs to be a REAL living wage in place, when an economy is as far out of kilter as it is today you acnnot keep blaming ordinariy people for being underpaid, and have a go at the way the unions did things in the seventies-we are not living in the seventies any more and the unions have been made too weak to stop the complete destruction of employment laws that protect peoples pay and conditions; and as one poster pointed out a good workforce is worth keeping, but that is no longer fashionable, most poeple are treated like a used tissue by companies. The public sector is well recognised as employing the most highly qualified people on all levels, but the pay for this does not reflect the training that the employees have done off their own backs.
We are stuck in a rut when it comes to finances in this country, nothing can improve until a radical rethink happens.
You said something very interesting ther about how a company will just stick up their prices rather than take a lower price-in that sentance lays the truth-GREED.

13 posts left

Your response

You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool



Chapel Hill Lewes 20:132
Chapel Hill Lewes

Get a cat? more
Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
Thomas Paine