On 18 May 2010 at 6:44pm mungo wrote:
I don't know how many of you bother with politics between elections ( judging by alot of the threads on here pre election, most of you haven't bothered with politics since the mid eighties.) but the true extent of how much crap the Labour party has left us in is starting to surface.
SPEND,SPEND,SPEND,SPEND,SPEND right up to the day that parliament was finally dissolved.
Before all you lefties get on your high horse and scream "This is just Tory spin", this afternoon leading private secretaries in the civil service have shown letters distancing them selves from ministers extravagant spending plans in the months leading up to the election. The civil servants advised the ministers against the plans as they felt that they were irresponsible and they did not want to be associated with them. These letters were written long before the election was called.
So here we go again, just like 1979, the Torys have to come in and sort out an almighty mess left by the Labour party, they will have to make cuts and I expect that they will have to put up taxes to try and get this country back on the straight and narrow.
So when all you lefties come on here in the coming weeks, months and years complaining about your tax going up or you have lost your job and you try and palm it off those nasty Torys I am going to come on here and ram it down your throats.
On 18 May 2010 at 6:54pm Clifford wrote:
I think you'll find what people are complaining about Mungo is that taxes will rise for those who can least afford it while the Tories will look after their friends. What was wrong with Labour was that it never looked after its friends but was, as Mandelson said, 'relaxed about people becoming filthy rich'. Don't imagine that everyone who criticizes the Tories and their Liberal cronies is a Labour supporter.
On 18 May 2010 at 7:45pm Red Ken wrote:
And Labour got the country out of an even bigger mess in 1997. Remember THAT Mungo you knob? Hmmmm...Thought not......Go back to your toys.
On 18 May 2010 at 8:04pm Mungo wrote:
Tell me Red Ken, what exactly was the mess that the Labour party inherited in 97?
On 18 May 2010 at 9:27pm Old cynic wrote:
Nice friendly post Mungo reminds me why I admire Tories so much.
On 18 May 2010 at 10:09pm Red Ken wrote:
Tories. Scum of the earth.
On 18 May 2010 at 10:15pm jrsussex wrote:
Mungo- Got it in one, say it like it is, well said. The so called mess of 1997 is simply untrue. Labour actually inherited quite a good financial position. It was nothing like the 1979 financial cock-up the Tory's inherited, history shows that it is true to say that Labour get us all into a mess and along come the Tory's who sort it out. Never forget that the vast majority of Labour voters under 40 at the time of the 1997 election had no idea what life was like under a Labour administration.
On 18 May 2010 at 10:49pm Red Ken wrote:
Same old Tories. spin spin spin.
On 19 May 2010 at 1:04am doc wrote:
As an NHS Dr married to a headteacher i cannot even begin to tell you the almighty mess the Tories left both the NHS and education system in.
You are the kind of vile right wing ranter who opens his/her gob without engaging the brain. Get your facts right sunshine, politics isnt just about the flippin economy my friend.
I'm no fan of Labour these days,but most left thinking people have the best intentions, whilst most Tory voters have their own interests at heart.
I know who i would rather have a drink with
On 19 May 2010 at 8:11am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
Well said, Clifford and the doc. The economy might have not been too bad in 1997, but then it wasn't too bad globally, so I'm not sure that the Tories can take all the credit for that.
However, public services were in a dreadful state, and it was achieved at huge cost, as any one of the 3m unemployed during the 80s or the hundreds of thousands who lost their homes will tell you.
A friend mentioned only the other day that they would only have 5 more years to pay on their mortgage if they hadn't lost their home, instead they're paying out £1,200 a month in rent. And that's why they stopped voting Tory.
On 19 May 2010 at 8:26am 'ere be monsters wrote:
It makes me laugh. You are all correct in what you say, Tories and Labour are both equally capable of messing things up, they have both done the boom to bust and back again. It really doesn't matter who gets in they will cock it up one way or another. Then the other lot get in, fix that and then cock it up another way. Same sh*t different colour. The reason nothing works is the likes of Red Ken on one hand slagging off the Tories on one hand, whatever they do, refusing to acknowledge the lash ups the Labour Party inflict on us, and jr doing the opposite with Labour and the Tories. If they could just get together and pick the best bit from both with a smidgeon of LibDem and run the country for the country and not themselves we might become the great nation we once were.
On 19 May 2010 at 8:42am Down and Out wrote:
What is it with jrsussex and hypocrisy? A couple of weeks ago he/she/it was telling us it was irrelevant to discuss Thatcher whilst talking about the Tories because that was ancient history. But now he/she/it is asking us to remember that Lab govt of 1979. Make your mind up!
I like a bit of history though. Why don't jr and Mungo tell us all about Norman Lamont and fiscal competence. eh?
On 19 May 2010 at 11:52am 'ere be monsters wrote:
Another prime example, D & O can't you see that Lamont AND Brown ballsed it up?
On 19 May 2010 at 12:18pm Down and Out wrote:
ebm - Yes, indeed I can.
But I'd also like it recognised, by those of a balanced disposition, that in due course the economic history books will show that, for the first six or seven years or so of Brown's chancellorship, he was really pretty good and that there isn't a convincing argument for saying that this was simply down to what he inherited from the Tories. Also that, when the global financial crisis struck he took the what were probably the best decisions possible quickly and effectively.
But I won't expect to see that from the Tory ranters anytime soon.
On 19 May 2010 at 12:30pm Mr Change wrote:
Ummmm, now what did Thatcher do for us, let me think, oh yes....
She privatised a lot of British companies like BT, BA, British Coal, British Rail, British Steel, and ruined our manufacturing sector.
She destroyed the unions and changed the laws governing them to render them powerless.
She allowed council tenants to buy their house which now is resulting in the tax payer having to house poor & homeless families in expensive rented accommodation.
Oh yes the management of public spending was so good it resulted in a 16% interest rate in order to try to keep it under control.
And to cap it all we now have a government who put themselves in power, the result of the recent election was that of ?no confidence' by the voting public, and yet we have seen two minority political parties, who have very little in common, put themselves into power and decide on our behalf that they will be there for 5 years!!! We all know if Labour and Liberals had been able to form a majority that's who would be in power now. The whole thing is a farce, the liberal government have just destroyed their own political party by making this, IMO, stupid decision to join a coalition with the opposing right wing party..... and they call this a democracy... my arse!
Oh & EBM I suggest you get yourself an opinion you can't live on the fence forever.
On 19 May 2010 at 12:36pm Clifford wrote:
Mr Change - though I agree with much of what you said I think you're mistake in believing that we have to come out in support of one party or another (and if that's not what you meant, forgive me for misunderstanding). What we're looking at is a system, capitalism, which (as history shows) has periodic booms and slumps regardless of which party is in power. The victims of these crises are, of course, always the people at the bottom as capitalism exists to ensure a tiny minority at the top stay rich whatever happens. The three main parties all believe in the capitalist system and differ very very very slightly at how best to run it. When things get really bad they all join together in a National Government - see the 1930s.
On 19 May 2010 at 12:37pm not from around here wrote:
It's not only about the economy but the economy IS the biggest single factor likely to affect our day-to-day lives. Doc I am in contact with many, many headteachers as a part of my work and anecdotally at least 'most' headteachers find the constant government interference and imposition of additional directives and targets over the last 13 years have seriously hampered their ability to run their schools in the way they need to.
Do the tories look after their own? If by 'their own' you are talking about working tax payers then that includes me. I don't want my taxes wasted on huge government bureaucracy or on a system that encourages some people to remain out of work.
I believe in a trickle-down effect in that if business is encouraged it does have a beneficial effect on all of us in the long-run.
On 19 May 2010 at 12:57pm Mr Change wrote:
Clifford you raise a good point and in regard to coalition governments this is not the first and I don't doubt it will be last, my point was really that only about 25% of the voting public want the Tories to be in power, and yes it is unlikely we will ever have 100% turnout to vote, but surely if people believe it is worth voting and that by doing so they can really make a difference then I believe people would.
I also believe that before Blair took a step to the right and Cameron took a step to the left there was much more of a difference in the parties than there are now.
As far as capitalism is concerned I don't personally believe in it, but without going into politics myself I have to make do with what's on offer, and in that respect I feel like my choice has been taken away in this latest election.
However I do believe something good has come of this election and that is that more people have become interested in a politics as a result, which, in the long term, can only be a good thing.....
On 19 May 2010 at 1:44pm Clifford wrote:
Mr Change - Yes, we can certainly agree on the fact that more people have become interested in politics and let's hope that it lasts.
On 19 May 2010 at 2:34pm 'ere be monsters wrote:
Mr C, as soon as there is an alternative to the entrenched beliefs of "Tory/Lab one or the other" then on the fence it is. It's not that uncomfortable and it's not so far to fall than of a high horse!
On 19 May 2010 at 2:35pm 'ere be monsters wrote:
Off a high horse
On 19 May 2010 at 2:47pm Mr Change wrote:
EBM Fair enough, but I would like to know what you believe would be good for this country? Surely there is a party out there somewhere that holds your beliefs...?
On 19 May 2010 at 3:26pm 'ere be monsters wrote:
Mixture of them all in actual fact
On 19 May 2010 at 3:42pm jrsussex wrote:
Down and Out - Fair comment, the only reason I mentioned 1979 was due to Red Ken mentioning the financial state of the UK when Labour took over in 1997, utterly false info.
As for the current UK government arrangement I am waiting to see where we go, far to early to praise or decry. If they succeed in bringing down the deficit, get people back into work and control the rise in inflation (the biggest enemy of them all) then I will be very content. I appreciate other problems are out there but those mentioned are the stumbling block to improvements in other areas.
On 19 May 2010 at 4:59pm Clifford wrote:
What I like when we talk about politics on here (as we did throughout the election) is that though we obviously disagree we usually manage to keep the temperature down and avoid abuse, whichever side of the argument we're on. I think we should take a bit of pride in that.
On 19 May 2010 at 5:22pm j.p wrote:
labour party sh#t con party sh#t lib party sh#t
theres no hope .
On 19 May 2010 at 5:39pm Clifford wrote:
See what I mean - you're abusing parties j.p. and not people. That's fair, if a bit unimaginative.
On 19 May 2010 at 8:21pm Mr Change wrote:
What's happened MUNGO, cat got your tonge?
On 19 May 2010 at 10:17pm The Tooth Fairy wrote:
Margaret Thatcher did not privatise British Rail, that was John Major's parting gift to the nation. While we're on the subject, Blair and the rest of his NeoConservatives had thirteen years to undo most of what the Tories did. You can draw your own conclusions to the fact that they chose not to.
On 19 May 2010 at 10:48pm Labour lover wrote:
Major simply carried on what Thatcher and Cecil Parkinson had started with the railways.
On 20 May 2010 at 8:07am 'ere be monsters wrote:
Beeching started it!!
On 20 May 2010 at 8:23am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
You're dead right, TF, and that's why so many people on the left are totally disenchanted with them.
The euphoria of ending all those years of Tory misrule was gone in days, as soon as they announced they'd be sticking to Tory spending plans. After all, if people had wanted Tory spending plans, they'd have kept the Tories in, wouldn't they? The failure to do anything about private companies making huge profits at the expense of public services was one of their biggest failings in my book, along with the war and the assault on civil liberties.
On 20 May 2010 at 8:42am 'ere be monsters wrote:
TF and ACT how right you are, after 13 years and an impending election they were suddenly coming up with plans to save billions to rescue their political necks, when if they'd done it years before we perhaps wouldn't be quite so deep in the doo dah as we are...ah!
On 20 May 2010 at 6:49pm Red Ken wrote:
Tories = bunch of cocks.
On 20 May 2010 at 7:55pm Mungo wrote:
Many apologies Mr Change I can only come on in the evenings and I was other wise engaged last night.
Doc, spending on the NHS is 60% up since 1997. Fantastic you say, however productivity is 4% down, how do you explain that. My sister works in the admin dept at the Princess Royal, in the last 10 years 4 levels of middle management have been put in between her and the manager she was answerable to 10 years ago. Does the dept work any better, she will tell you no it actually works alot worse (to many cooks and all that)
Education, the last Labour administration have created a whole generation of young adults with qualifications up to their eye balls and the intelligence of a knat. How? Dumbing down in order for pass rates at all levels to look impressive when PM goes to the dispatch box.
Of course the economy is the most important part of any administration because without it you would be able to do nothing.
The problem with you socialists is that you want everything regardless of how much it costs. Just like a child .
Red Ken, I noticed with interest that you called me a knob yet you still haven't answered my question on 1997.
On 20 May 2010 at 9:51pm Big Norm wrote:
' The problem with socialiism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money'. Like now.
On 20 May 2010 at 11:36pm Red Ken wrote:
Mungo.....If up to 1997 was SO GOOD why did Labour get in with a landslide victory? Answer: Because the Tories were a shambles and couldn't govern a village fete. For example: does Black Wednesday ring any bells?
If the recent Labour government was SO BAD why didn't the Tories get a similar landslide? Answer: Some people have long memories.
Not rocket science is it?
On 21 May 2010 at 7:48am Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I think you may have misterpreted me, EBM. My disillusionment with the Blair government was because they were spending too little, not too much.
The need to raise billions now is largely because they had to spend billions to bail out the banks rom the mess created by their greed and profligacy, and the party's failure to make rich people pay more tax.
On 21 May 2010 at 8:17am 'ere be monsters wrote:
I don't think I did ACT, I agreed with you and went on to make another point.
Red Ken, congratulations, you managed to get someone to write a whole sentence for you without calling any one names, are you growing up?
Mungo, what more perfect a place could you have put in such an obvious spelling mistake, comic genius.
On 21 May 2010 at 8:23am Clifford wrote:
Big Norm wrote: ' The problem with socialiism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money'. Like now.
The trouble with Tories is that they keep repeating absurd slogans that they don't really understand. Like now. Wasn't it the banks that ran out of other people's money and had to be propped up by the taxpayers?
On 21 May 2010 at 4:41pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
When you run out of other (rich) people's money, you just tax them some more. Wtf should unearned income be taxed at a lower rate than mincome people work for?
On 23 May 2010 at 7:56pm old Cynic wrote:
Mungo for the record its spelt gnat - LOL!!!