Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did George Osbourne really just say that the government now has the chance to give the economy 110% of its attention? We're doomed!" Ahem..... WTF were they doing beforehand then?????? 
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did George Osbourne really just say that the government now has the chance to give the economy 110% of its attention? We're doomed! Ahem..... WTF were they doing beforehand then??????
"Trying to understand percentages? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did George Osbourne really just say that the government now has the chance to give the economy 110% of its attention? We're doomed! Ahem..... WTF were they doing beforehand then??????
Trying to understand percentages?"I'd love to PMSL, but the weird thing is...... I could actually believe that with this lot! Gideon (call me George) Osborne leaves with me with 1% confidence and 99% dread about what the state of the countrys' finances will be by the time we get to the next election..... 
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"must be the worst chancellor we have had in a long time the guy is a total amateur the longer he stays the deeper the recession will get we have no chance" Fuck is he Chancellor? I thought he was the Tor resident comedian!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. " At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. " which is the way they did it in the US.... basically give every person who is contributing thru paying tax 1000 dollars in the stimulus package.... I would do the same here... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. " Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. " Now that is not a bad idea especially as our manufacturing is taking a huge hit thus slowing down our growth and subsequent recovery from recession. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. " So the Treasury loses out on VAT not paid for three months, and people buying British goods will simply say, "Ta chum" and leave it in the bank. How is that helping the economy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. " That's not a bad idea and shows the type of fresh thinking that we need. That said I don't believe it's an option because we would probably have other countries retaliate by hammering British exports with increased taxation. I also think there are European rules against 'tax discrimination' between member states. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. So the Treasury loses out on VAT not paid for three months, and people buying British goods will simply say, "Ta chum" and leave it in the bank. How is that helping the economy?" By stimulating demand Wishy. One of the main problems right now is that people are not spending. As for the Treasury losing out, respectfully, maybe your missing the point, we are talking about printing money here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. That's not a bad idea and shows the type of fresh thinking that we need. That said I don't believe it's an option because we would probably have other countries retaliate by hammering British exports with increased taxation. I also think there are European rules against 'tax discrimination' between member states. " Definately can't discrimate against any product made anywhere in the EU, even if it's just packed here. It is an interesting prospect to return money directly to people but £150 won't change anything. If they returned say £2500 per tax payer, and thats probably less than one payment of QE (normally about £50 billion at a time)then it would have a short term benefit to the economy. Some would save, some would repay debt and some would spend, but at the moment non of the money coming out of QE seems to go anywhere of any use even on a short term basis. As for George Osborne doing well, I'd have to disagree. For a chanceloor to make 3 major U turns on his most recent budget was nothing less than shocking. For his forecasts to be so far out, predicted growth by Osborne over his first 2 years in office +5%, actual -0.5%, the actions he has taken may or may not have kept the UK on AAA but at a cost of a double dip recession which is getting deeper and shortly to see the growth in the numbers unemployed coupled with almost every person in UK spending as little as possible. Frankly the current government look like they have no real idea how to take the economy forward and are casting out lines to see if something takes a bait, this week it's lets build more, after having put a stop on most building projects, next week it'll be whatever comes out of the hat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We've retained our AAA rating whilst almost every other European country has been downgraded. I'd say he's doing a good job under very difficult circumstances. " But what are we being compared to, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy etc? We may have an AAA rating for now, but it does not mean he's doing a good job. 0% growth is not growth, it's stagnation. If we had more of the strength of Germany, or some of the growth that even the US has had, we'd be more befitting of a AAA. The fact that forecasts have been consistently downgraded since this lot almost came to power - they had to forge a coalition, because not enough people wanted them back of course - shows that deficit reduction as the sole focus of plan A has not been sufficient. A plan for growth that was realistic, flexible and successful is what we've needed. I don't only vote for one party, nor support any one party, but this lot are beyond the pale atm. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was talking to a friend the other day about this government's performance and one thing that we highlighted is tha they have no genuine idea on how the masses live. Many of our politicians come from privileged backgrounds so it feels like they make decisions for themselves rather than us. Sorry to go a bit off topic but I'm annoyed by this Government's arrogance and naivety and George Osborne shows it the most in his decisions." Interestingly that reiterates a comment that i made on a previous forum.... ....those that make the rules DO NOT suffer by them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was talking to a friend the other day about this government's performance and one thing that we highlighted is tha they have no genuine idea on how the masses live. Many of our politicians come from privileged backgrounds so it feels like they make decisions for themselves rather than us. Sorry to go a bit off topic but I'm annoyed by this Government's arrogance and naivety and George Osborne shows it the most in his decisions." Sorry to burst your bubble but we had this in another Thread and the fact is of the 23 members of the Government Front Bench (ie those that make the decisions) 3 are from inherited wealthy backgrounds. Cameron, Osbourne and Lord Strathclyde. The rest come from either Working or Middle Class backgrounds, most from a Grammar or Comprehensive education and all went to University. So I would venture to suggest 'this lot' are more in touch with what you need to do to succeed than you seem to be saying in your post. There is a link on the BBC 'Democracy Live' website and you can view each Minister's Biography. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My concern is the guy in charge of all things financial thinks 110% is a valid number doh!!!" Dear oh dear... its simply an expression widely used by sportsmen, business people, motivators, lecturers et al ... 
You should be more concerned at what our last (Labour) Chancellor thought 110% was. Borrow 100% and spend 110%!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did George Osbourne really just say that the government now has the chance to give the economy 110% of its attention? We're doomed!" He comes across as a twonk but I would et my last £10 he ha more savy with economics than anyone on the forums | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did George Osbourne really just say that the government now has the chance to give the economy 110% of its attention? We're doomed! He comes across as a twonk but I would et my last £10 he ha more savy with economics than anyone on the forums "Had to smile at 'twonk' yeah grant you he does that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There are so many people on here who are in the wrong vocation its staggering. The reality is who ever are in power its the civil servants who steer them and have the real knowledge. God forbid they let George Osborne make any real decisions. " 
"Yes Minister" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"There are so many people on here who are in the wrong vocation its staggering. The reality is who ever are in power its the civil servants who steer them and have the real knowledge. God forbid they let George Osborne make any real decisions. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and not one word about that fuckwit Gordon Brown who dug us into this hole we are in. Tell you what I would rather have 0.5% proper growth than the 2.5% bubble he created. Lesson one people: The markets rule and you have to keep them 'onside' which we have. The reduction in interest costs on our massive borrowing alone is worth what has been done. Lesson two: Europe is our biggest export market (although we are now exporting more to non European countries) and while they sit wringing their hands over the Euro it will impact on our economy. Simples! I do smile at the way the supposed 'U Turns' are played out. So: You don't change your mind in view of the changing circumstances and get called stubborn and an ideologist or you do change your mind and its called a U Turn! Beats me! I just wish Labour had made a few U Turns on its way to destroying our economy .... Cue 'Selective Amnesic responses'.. "Gordon Brown didn't destroy our economy. The banks did. Yes, the Labour government made mistakes, most glaringly falling into the trap of not regulating the banks harshly enough, but the rest of the major world economies did the same. You can't blame Gordon Brown for the debt crisis in Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Spain... What I do blame Gordon Brown for is trusting the free market economy too much and allowing wank..sorry, bankers to run our economy... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and not one word about that fuckwit Gordon Brown who dug us into this hole we are in. Tell you what I would rather have 0.5% proper growth than the 2.5% bubble he created. Lesson one people: The markets rule and you have to keep them 'onside' which we have. The reduction in interest costs on our massive borrowing alone is worth what has been done. Lesson two: Europe is our biggest export market (although we are now exporting more to non European countries) and while they sit wringing their hands over the Euro it will impact on our economy. Simples! I do smile at the way the supposed 'U Turns' are played out. So: You don't change your mind in view of the changing circumstances and get called stubborn and an ideologist or you do change your mind and its called a U Turn! Beats me! I just wish Labour had made a few U Turns on its way to destroying our economy .... Cue 'Selective Amnesic responses'.. "Gordon Brown didn't destroy our economy. The banks did. Yes, the Labour government made mistakes, most glaringly falling into the trap of not regulating the banks harshly enough, but the rest of the major world economies did the same. You can't blame Gordon Brown for the debt crisis in Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Spain... What I do blame Gordon Brown for is trusting the free market economy too much and allowing wank..sorry, bankers to run our economy... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maggie wiped out heavy manufacturing in 1 decade, in her madness she reckoned we did not need it. This must be the only country in the world to have a leader who thought like that and that is one reason we have nothing to sell." ...and the unions had nothing to do with killing British Industry. It was Maggie that broke thier stranglehold and we were a damn sight better off when she and Major left power than when she inherited it from ..guess who? Callaghan the only British Chancellor to need help from the World Bank. " As for the above still blaming Gordon Brown for all the worlds ills it was a worldwide thing caused by the banks having a free hand to do what they wanted whether it be legal or illegal." And who gave them the 'free hand' by inventing a tripartite regulatory system that didn't know what each part was doing? Gordon Brown and Ed Balls. The same Ed Ballsup that has all the catchphrase economic solutions... " I am sure they will still try and blame him for the stagnant economy of today but those who can think know the blame lies with Ozzy." Erm forgive me but Gordon 'Mr Invisible unless there is a fee in it' Brown was either Chancellor or Prime Minister for 13 years. Osbourne has only been at the job for 2 1/2 years and you blame Osbourne for all the problems. So a Conservative Government 30 odd years ago and Osbourne's 2 1/2 years are the problem. Labour's 13 years had no effect whatsoever? I said there would be 'Selective Amnesia' in this Thread but that really does defy all logic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If they go down the QE route again I think they should just put £150 in each and every person's account. It really can't do any worse than the QE measures already taken. We might all then go out and spend £100. At least that would stimulate demand instead of giving it to the banks so that it can just sit on their balance sheets. Some would just save it or spend it on imported goods. Maybe money invested in no VAT on British manufactured goods for a 3 month time period say may help more. " thats a no no.... it is against WTO rules, and what would stop other countries doing the same.... it could in effect cripple your export industry there is nothing to stop you from for example a campaign for people to buy "british produced products"... and make it aware that you are helping your fellow country people, which is what they do in the US, and Japan, and China.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"....and no Gordon Brown didn't destroy our economy. The banks did. Yes, the Labour government made mistakes, most glaringly falling into the trap of not regulating the banks harshly enough, but the rest of the major world economies did the same. You can't blame Gordon Brown for the debt crisis in Iceland, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Spain... What I do blame Gordon Brown for is trusting the free market economy too much and allowing wank..sorry, bankers to run our economy..." I agree with much of what you've said. Don't forget it was Thatcher who deregulated the banks and right upto the credit crisis the Tories are on record opposing any increase in bank regulation. Many of them simply saw regulation as red tape. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"whatever the who did this when and who did that when and how much was in the kitty when this lot took over etc etc.. the current economic 'policy' is not working.. yes there is a lack of confidence within the country.. yes probably lots of the banks are storing cash or liquidity for when the euro fails.. but within all that the coalitions race to get rid of the defecit as quickly as they are by increasing the unemployment stats..? more u turns than a learner driver on the magic roundabout in Swindon is not exactly confidence inviting or even an indicator of competency.. capital investment in building guess what... houses with the employment and the boost to the housing market etc would be a better course of action than what they are doing... btw, what are they doing? what is the 'economic policy' of our dave n george?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Maggie wiped out heavy manufacturing in 1 decade, in her madness she reckoned we did not need it. This must be the only country in the world to have a leader who thought like that and that is one reason we have nothing to sell. ...and the unions had nothing to do with killing British Industry. It was Maggie that broke thier stranglehold and we were a damn sight better off when she and Major left power than when she inherited it from ..guess who? Callaghan the only British Chancellor to need help from the World Bank. As for the above still blaming Gordon Brown for all the worlds ills it was a worldwide thing caused by the banks having a free hand to do what they wanted whether it be legal or illegal. And who gave them the 'free hand' by inventing a tripartite regulatory system that didn't know what each part was doing? Gordon Brown and Ed Balls. The same Ed Ballsup that has all the catchphrase economic solutions... I am sure they will still try and blame him for the stagnant economy of today but those who can think know the blame lies with Ozzy. Erm forgive me but Gordon 'Mr Invisible unless there is a fee in it' Brown was either Chancellor or Prime Minister for 13 years. Osbourne has only been at the job for 2 1/2 years and you blame Osbourne for all the problems. So a Conservative Government 30 odd years ago and Osbourne's 2 1/2 years are the problem. Labour's 13 years had no effect whatsoever? I said there would be 'Selective Amnesia' in this Thread but that really does defy all logic." selective amnesia,hmmmm wonder where you got that from hmmmmmm again. once maggie deregulated,and empowered banks policing of themselves,there was no going back. only a simpleton,could still believe,gordon brown or the last labour government,could be responsible for a world wide recession. in britain today,most of the major manufacturing projects,were signed off by gordon brown.thus ensuring,even if labour were not in power,britain would still be working. in any other age,edd milliband would be just be another unelectable labour leader,only dave,and gideon,could make him prime minister elect. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The reason we have stagnant growth is because the government and the media want us to believe it.. (don’t know why) They keep rattling on about recession and doom and gloom. no wonder no one is buying anything. We are told that stuff is more expensive that people have no money For those of us that can remember the 70s here are a few truths I earned £45 a week it cost £15 to fill my large car with fuel (a third of my wages) Now it cost £75 for a same size car and I now earn a lot more than £250 doing the same job I bought a auto washing machine in 1979 cost me £250 (3 weeks wages ish) I just bought one a few weeks back for the same money Holidays are the same in the 70s one week in Spain 4 weeks wages now I can get a week for less than half my wages. Plus remember back then we didn’t have to pay for mobiles, sky, dishwashers, computers. Internet. Flat screen TVs DVD players Etc etc but we do now I run a 18 year old car now and its one of the oldest on the road. People now have mostly 10 year old cars and many have new cars just look next time your driving and try and spot a 20 year old car.. I could go on. Recession what recession anyone would think there are millions homeless begging on the streets if we believed what our peers tell us. Yes some of us have been affected by the down turn in sales my wages are cut from 2 years ago but Im not skint Yes the banks got into trouble by being to greedy and we bailed them out but anyone would think we had to give up half of everything we own If every one just carried on just being sensible we wouldn’t be in this mess " Blimey .. an oasis of reality in a desert of make believe .. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"selective amnesia,hmmmm wonder where you got that from hmmmmmm again. once maggie deregulated,and empowered banks policing of themselves,there was no going back." Well you clearly suffer from it .. And Maggie never deregulated the Banks at all ffs. She opened up the Stock Exchange from the Old Boys Network but kept the Bank of England regulating it and the Banks. It WAS Gordon Brown who took regulation away from the B of E and invented a system that failed. And failed badly. " only a simpleton,could still believe,gordon brown or the last labour government,could be responsible for a world wide recession. " true to form the Lefties resort to personal abuse but hey ho. Brown was overspending even before the Banks crisis hit. He sold off half our gold at Boot Sale peices, had windfall revenue for Mobile phone licences and still borrowed like there was no tomorrow. Which of cours ethere wasn't for him! The Governer of the B of E said so on two occasions but had no control. His last two budgets were labelled 'Credit Card Budgets' by the Financial Times and he was running an unsustainable deficit. And so we had no resources left to handle the International Bank failures. " in britain today,most of the major manufacturing projects,were signed off by gordon brown.thus ensuring,even if labour were not in power,britain would still be working. in any other age,edd milliband would be just be another unelectable labour leader,only dave,and gideon,could make him prime minister elect." Hellooo?..What major manufacturing projects? 2 aircraft carriers that were totally unfunded projects which helped cause a £35 Billion black hole at the MOD? And were being built in Labour constituencies all over GB ending up in Rosyth? OH isn't that Gordon Brown's constituency? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"selective amnesia,hmmmm wonder where you got that from hmmmmmm again. once maggie deregulated,and empowered banks policing of themselves,there was no going back. Well you clearly suffer from it .. And Maggie never deregulated the Banks at all ffs. She opened up the Stock Exchange from the Old Boys Network but kept the Bank of England regulating it and the Banks. It WAS Gordon Brown who took regulation away from the B of E and invented a system that failed. And failed badly. only a simpleton,could still believe,gordon brown or the last labour government,could be responsible for a world wide recession. true to form the Lefties resort to personal abuse but hey ho. Brown was overspending even before the Banks crisis hit. He sold off half our gold at Boot Sale peices, had windfall revenue for Mobile phone licences and still borrowed like there was no tomorrow. Which of cours ethere wasn't for him! The Governer of the B of E said so on two occasions but had no control. His last two budgets were labelled 'Credit Card Budgets' by the Financial Times and he was running an unsustainable deficit. And so we had no resources left to handle the International Bank failures. in britain today,most of the major manufacturing projects,were signed off by gordon brown.thus ensuring,even if labour were not in power,britain would still be working. in any other age,edd milliband would be just be another unelectable labour leader,only dave,and gideon,could make him prime minister elect. Hellooo?..What major manufacturing projects? 2 aircraft carriers that were totally unfunded projects which helped cause a £35 Billion black hole at the MOD? And were being built in Labour constituencies all over GB ending up in Rosyth? OH isn't that Gordon Brown's constituency?" ha ha ha hahaha,, . are we forgetting the schools,and the hospitals,oooops. i would expect nothing less,from those who suffer selective amnesia.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ha ha ha hahaha,, . are we forgetting the schools,and the hospitals,oooops. i would expect nothing less,from those who suffer selective amnesia. "Oh sorry you said 'manufacturing'. Schools and hospitals are 'Infrastructure' so no 'selective amnesia' here just someone not using the same English that I do.... Now are these the schools and hospitals that were built using PFI where private investors pay for the project and not the Brown Treasury? And the same PFI projects that the Treasury negotiated and that nearly destroyed London Underground and are now causing NHS Trusts to go bankrupt because of the contracts the Treasury foisted on them? Yes I do believe it was. Brown couldn't fund them because he had spent all the money som he did his 'Smoke and mirrors' trick, got someone else to pay for it but took the credit. The man was a con artist pure and simple. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was talking to a friend the other day about this government's performance and one thing that we highlighted is tha they have no genuine idea on how the masses live. Many of our politicians come from privileged backgrounds so it feels like they make decisions for themselves rather than us. Sorry to go a bit off topic but I'm annoyed by this Government's arrogance and naivety and George Osborne shows it the most in his decisions. Sorry to burst your bubble but we had this in another Thread and the fact is of the 23 members of the Government Front Bench (ie those that make the decisions) 3 are from inherited wealthy backgrounds. Cameron, Osbourne and Lord Strathclyde. The rest come from either Working or Middle Class backgrounds, most from a Grammar or Comprehensive education and all went to University. So I would venture to suggest 'this lot' are more in touch with what you need to do to succeed than you seem to be saying in your post. There is a link on the BBC 'Democracy Live' website and you can view each Minister's Biography." I looked at the link you gave me and was pleasantly surprised. Though many of the cabinet ministers enjoy varied education, it's nice to know that some ministers worked hard to get to where they are and I respect that. It's funny you should talk about University. With the current cost of going to University being so high, who's now more likely to attend? So many middle and working class will be priced out. Again, sorry for going off topic. Last time. Promise! Lol  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I looked at the link you gave me and was pleasantly surprised. Though many of the cabinet ministers enjoy varied education, it's nice to know that some ministers worked hard to get to where they are and I respect that. It's funny you should talk about University. With the current cost of going to University being so high, who's now more likely to attend? So many middle and working class will be priced out. Again, sorry for going off topic. Last time. Promise! Lol "Hehe ..going off topic is perfectly fine by me my friend.
As for University it is actually more affordable and accessible now because you don't pay anything up front (as before) and you don't repay the loan until you earn above a certain figure..and then it is a stepped repayment plan. And of course you don't repay anything if you don't graduate.
No doubt the Lefties will whinge about the amount of a loan on Graduation but the costs are now spread out over many years and there are safeguards built in.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The reason we have stagnant growth is because the government and the media want us to believe it.. (don’t know why) They keep rattling on about recession and doom and gloom. no wonder no one is buying anything. We are told that stuff is more expensive that people have no money For those of us that can remember the 70s here are a few truths I earned £45 a week it cost £15 to fill my large car with fuel (a third of my wages) Now it cost £75 for a same size car and I now earn a lot more than £250 doing the same job I bought a auto washing machine in 1979 cost me £250 (3 weeks wages ish) I just bought one a few weeks back for the same money Holidays are the same in the 70s one week in Spain 4 weeks wages now I can get a week for less than half my wages. Plus remember back then we didn’t have to pay for mobiles, sky, dishwashers, computers. Internet. Flat screen TVs DVD players Etc etc but we do now I run a 18 year old car now and its one of the oldest on the road. People now have mostly 10 year old cars and many have new cars just look next time your driving and try and spot a 20 year old car.. I could go on. Recession what recession anyone would think there are millions homeless begging on the streets if we believed what our peers tell us. Yes some of us have been affected by the down turn in sales my wages are cut from 2 years ago but Im not skint Yes the banks got into trouble by being to greedy and we bailed them out but anyone would think we had to give up half of everything we own If every one just carried on just being sensible we wouldn’t be in this mess" Agree with nearly all that (can remember most of it too - not a good sign!), but the reason so many are worried about their own financial situation is the disproportionate shift in the %age of your income going on housing costs. You can check the following as it was stated by the guy at the Treasury who arranged the bank rolling of the Falklands camapaign:- 1982 average salary £8,500. 1982 average house price £23,000. (i.e. house price 2.7 times av earnings) 2007 average salary £23,000 BUT...... average house price...... £181,000!!! i.e. 7.87 times av salary. Basically, we weren't all so so strapped for disposable income in the 70's so even though there were recessions, we could all weather the storm by cutting back here and there without jeopardising the roof over our heads. And totally agree with what you say about ignoring the media doom and gloom, and just getting on with it and continue spending as normal - quickest way out of a recession, but unfortunately those who control the majority of the money in the economy are hanging on to it like life and death - hence nothing is moving..
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not a financial wiz kid and I admit some stuff is more expensive (That’s supply and demand) it is inevitable that the better off you become the more demand there is to buy something nicer and we have a lot more stuff we are told we “need” to buy now days, Please don’t think I’m being elitist again (god forbid) I am the last person to spend money and I know some reading this will be worrying where they are going to find enough for a pint of milk (Us sometimes) but back then people only bought something when the old one broke now they replace it when a new version comes out. Most of us had car and maybe house insurance… now Gill insists we need more policies for things i didn’t know we even had. You say about house prices but everything in that house is cheaper, there aren’t many things in our house’s that you cant replace with one weeks average wage and as I said before there’s 100 x more stuff…. I don’t know what percent of my wages I would spend back then on food but I know there wasn’t huge superstores convincing me I need to buy cous cous or low fat yogurts and some people must buy it or the place’s wouldn’t sell it I just get pissed of with media telling me the worlds about to end. Some People still have the money…I don’t see tickets for the Olympics being discounted, the pubs are still full on Sunday lunch time with people eating out We are Mr and Mrs Average but two of our kids with (no help from us I might ad) in their early twenties are getting married in Cuba (not to each other) have two cars, I phones, I pads and a life style we haven’t managed to archive in 35 years. Yes they say they are skint but skint back then was a bag of chips and a pint on a Saturday night now they fuck off to some night club 100 miles away with a coach load of mates " I do agree that the definition of skint has changed significantly for many. But there are people not feeding their children - food charities have seen a marked increase in the demand for their services as did school breakfast clubs for those on free school meals. I grew up poor. The day the bus fare went up ha'penny and my sister and I had spent it on a black jack, not knowing the fare had increased, was an interesting lesson! I remember the recessions of the 70s, admittedly as a childn seeing the nothing we had and the despair and literal counting of pennies my parents went through. I remember the recessions in the 80s and 90s. I have said before that this one feels different because the response has been for companies to move people to part-time jobs. The most marginalised are feeling the effect. If you own your home it is a major expense but interest rates are lower than any other recession period we have experienced. If you own your home and have work then you will see some costs have risen but you can manage by cutting back on some of the luxuries - and that feels like a hardship to some. If you had not a lot to begin with then the cuts you have to make are on things like paying the rent and buying food. The issue remains that until we get a sense that the economy is going to improve those with the money and some prudence will not spend in the same way. Those less prudent will continue to spend with credit, and we know that does not help in the long run. Those without have nothing left to spend. That applies to businesses as much as individuals. I still think that if another round of QE is introduced then the money would be be more effectively used by handing it to us directly to stimulate spending. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The reason we have stagnant growth is because the government and the media want us to believe it.. (don’t know why) They keep rattling on about recession and doom and gloom. no wonder no one is buying anything. We are told that stuff is more expensive that people have no money For those of us that can remember the 70s here are a few truths I earned £45 a week it cost £15 to fill my large car with fuel (a third of my wages) Now it cost £75 for a same size car and I now earn a lot more than £250 doing the same job I bought a auto washing machine in 1979 cost me £250 (3 weeks wages ish) I just bought one a few weeks back for the same money Holidays are the same in the 70s one week in Spain 4 weeks wages now I can get a week for less than half my wages. Plus remember back then we didn’t have to pay for mobiles, sky, dishwashers, computers. Internet. Flat screen TVs DVD players Etc etc but we do now I run a 18 year old car now and its one of the oldest on the road. People now have mostly 10 year old cars and many have new cars just look next time your driving and try and spot a 20 year old car.. I could go on. Recession what recession anyone would think there are millions homeless begging on the streets if we believed what our peers tell us. Yes some of us have been affected by the down turn in sales my wages are cut from 2 years ago but Im not skint Yes the banks got into trouble by being to greedy and we bailed them out but anyone would think we had to give up half of everything we own If every one just carried on just being sensible we wouldn’t be in this mess Blimey .. an oasis of reality in a desert of make believe .. "+1...good post | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I am not a financial wiz kid and I admit some stuff is more expensive (That’s supply and demand) it is inevitable that the better off you become the more demand there is to buy something nicer and we have a lot more stuff we are told we “need” to buy now days, Please don’t think I’m being elitist again (god forbid) I am the last person to spend money and I know some reading this will be worrying where they are going to find enough for a pint of milk (Us sometimes) but back then people only bought something when the old one broke now they replace it when a new version comes out. Most of us had car and maybe house insurance… now Gill insists we need more policies for things i didn’t know we even had. You say about house prices but everything in that house is cheaper, there aren’t many things in our house’s that you cant replace with one weeks average wage and as I said before there’s 100 x more stuff…. I don’t know what percent of my wages I would spend back then on food but I know there wasn’t huge superstores convincing me I need to buy cous cous or low fat yogurts and some people must buy it or the place’s wouldn’t sell it I just get pissed of with media telling me the worlds about to end. Some People still have the money…I don’t see tickets for the Olympics being discounted, the pubs are still full on Sunday lunch time with people eating out We are Mr and Mrs Average but two of our kids with (no help from us I might ad) in their early twenties are getting married in Cuba (not to each other) have two cars, I phones, I pads and a life style we haven’t managed to archive in 35 years. Yes they say they are skint but skint back then was a bag of chips and a pint on a Saturday night now they fuck off to some night club 100 miles away with a coach load of mates I do agree that the definition of skint has changed significantly for many. But there are people not feeding their children - food charities have seen a marked increase in the demand for their services as did school breakfast clubs for those on free school meals. I grew up poor. The day the bus fare went up ha'penny and my sister and I had spent it on a black jack, not knowing the fare had increased, was an interesting lesson! I remember the recessions of the 70s, admittedly as a childn seeing the nothing we had and the despair and literal counting of pennies my parents went through. I remember the recessions in the 80s and 90s. I have said before that this one feels different because the response has been for companies to move people to part-time jobs. The most marginalised are feeling the effect. If you own your home it is a major expense but interest rates are lower than any other recession period we have experienced. If you own your home and have work then you will see some costs have risen but you can manage by cutting back on some of the luxuries - and that feels like a hardship to some. If you had not a lot to begin with then the cuts you have to make are on things like paying the rent and buying food. The issue remains that until we get a sense that the economy is going to improve those with the money and some prudence will not spend in the same way. Those less prudent will continue to spend with credit, and we know that does not help in the long run. Those without have nothing left to spend. That applies to businesses as much as individuals. I still think that if another round of QE is introduced then the money would be be more effectively used by handing it to us directly to stimulate spending." G and T Essex and Licketsplits:- I think the one thing all three of us agree on is that we have seen all this before and we got through it, but this time there is way too much media concentration on the doom and gloom, that it is strangling a recovery before it has chance to get going. Add to that the lack of public confidence in the ability/experience/flair of the current 'Chancellor' (I use that term carefully) and you have a recipe for disaster. One thing I WOULD do is pump money into the idea floated a few years back for sending pupils near the end of Key Stage 3 to third world countries to see what the world is really like. I was lucky enough to go to West Africa 30 years ago for a longer period than just a holiday, and the experience has stayed with me ever since. Poverty in the UK? Don't make me laugh!!!!! 
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Charlie2012 you are without a doubt the master of selective amnesia Maggie let big business run amok oh and deregulated the banks even before the world knew who Gordon was." OK simple question. Where and when did Maggie deregulate the banks? Give us a link or give facts. You can't because she didn't. She opened up the Financial Markets not the banks. And big business has always 'run amok' no news there. " British industry was damaged far more by lack of investment than unions, in the 7os when I was an apprentice we were using machinery from Victorian times while the rest of the world including the far east was investing in modern machinery and the wages and conditions were terrible although huge profits were being made" Now this may come as a surprise but I agree with you. And I was a £5 a week apprenticed Jig & Tool maker. British Industry was badly managed, failed to invest but was strangled by militant unions and you couldn't get better examples than 'Red Robbo' and British Leyland. I saw at first hand how militant unions worked and it was not a nice place to be. " strange how every one of your posts always blames GB for whatever the topic is at the time I have never saw a more blinkered person than you in these forums, you dont happen to be David Cameron below that helmet?" No need to exaggerate! Its not strange to respond to people when they make statements with which I disagree. As you do. But it is very strange of you to say 'every one of your posts always blames GB'. I post on a variety of Threads! But GB has to come into it when people blame the new Coalition government in isolation and fail to mention the 13 years of what GB did. Its called balanced debate. A more blinkered person? I challenge people on their views and offer a different perspective. And many agree with me and many don't. But what I don't do is get personal as Lefties like you always do. Being 'blinkered' is to fail to see the wider picture and achnowledge facts. I think that applies to you and your leftie mates far more accurately than myself. Its like those 13 years never happened for people like you, Ed Millifuckwit and Ed Ballsup! Please debate. Lets leave the personal stuff out of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" One thing I WOULD do is pump money into the idea floated a few years back for sending pupils near the end of Key Stage 3 to third world countries to see what the world is really like. I was lucky enough to go to West Africa 30 years ago for a longer period than just a holiday, and the experience has stayed with me ever since. Poverty in the UK? Don't make me laugh!!!!!
"
I worked in the Ivory Coast as a teenager. Big reality check for me and, like you, you never forget REAL poverty. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"QE has not and is not and will not work, all its doing is adding the coffers of the banks. The best and obvious way is to give it direct to the public with the stipulation that its used on products from this country. Ok it cant be enforced but enough people would do as asked to make a difference. The other thing is stop large companies using agency workers. I cant get a full time job but there are companies I work for via agencies that only use agency staff on a full time basis! Thing there is no job security, one day you have work the next you don't. So who is going to spend anything when you don't know when your next pay day will be! " And one of the worst things about that sort of temporary contract 'full time' job is that your pension isn't really being contributed to effectively. Thus we're perpetuating a situation where workers will become ever longer enslaved into a low wage culture, out of desperation. The media is largely controlled by the very wealthy, so they're happy to stoke fear amongst people. We can't generally trust them to give us a balanced perspective on the real data of the world. The current policy is a race to the bottom, low paid, low security jobs, minimal retirement provision, health service that becomes more like the privatised US system, that only the rich could afford etc. The UK population lives longer than the Americans, in part due to their historically shocking health coverage... so we may start to see the trend for longer lives being curtailed here. It's not a healthy mindset to create, where people exist in a fear based culture. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why on earth would a bank lend money to anyone right now . It was due to lending to people going bust they got into trouble and that was when money was flowing freely .too many people are low life stealing scum bags . No one should be borrowing to expand , if they have a good business they will have income then save ! It is far too acceptable to borrow and even worse it is cited as a solution the term is leverage and it is greedy and dangerous . if these small business think they deserve to expand may I suggest the directors place their own money at risk as for injecting money into economy , not yet ! We still owe far to much , giving, money away tax breaks will not stimulate anything , it is a state of mind that needs to change and that will take time . Stimulus must only be given on the way out and we are no where near yet , the government know this .token cash give away will only reduce the amount of cash we have to spend on essentials and debt reduction and if you think the banks are so rich, and greedy put money where mouth is and buy their shares oddly enough by all of us buying shares the county would recover but no we sell and as the countries wealth is under pinned by assets ie house and shares . " dont entirely agree there my friend. i borrowed money to expand many years ago during the last recession because i had a solid business with full order books i couldnt fulfil without the investment to buy equipment and raw materials. it was bloody hard and i put 60% of the money in myself and borrowed the rest heavily secured on my family home and my business. But because the business model was solid the banks lent the money. i now employ 95 people all of whom earning above average salary with an annual turnover of nearly £10 mil. I borrowed £65k by the way and put in £80k of my own compnay cash reserve. its not wrong to borrow to invest if the business plan supports it, its only wrong to borrow if you cant justify it, and thats where the banks went wrong before. i work as a small business mentor and i have at least 5 companies i work with who are in a position to grow their business if they had cash flow injection but the banks dont want to know. we are chasing private equity investors now who all think the investments are sound and cant understand why the bansk wont lend on it. one company has a comfirmed order for goods totally £2million but they cant fulfil it because they need to purchase raw materials, buy 1 new machine and employ 4 people. They need £160k to do it. yet their bank has said no. They are currently in profit and have been for years, they show steady growth, run a tight ship and this order would catapult them forward. yet no dice from the bank. there are pleny of companies looking to grow and employ people and the only way for them is to borrow the money to start with. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@2012 So you keep referring to "left wingers in all your posts (see below.) "But what I don't do is get personal as Lefties like you always do. Being 'blinkered' is to fail to see the wider picture and achnowledge facts. I think that applies to you and your leftie mates far more accurately than myself. Its like those 13 years never happened for people like you,.............cut" "cut.....No doubt the Lefties will whinge about the amount of a loan on Graduation but the costs are now spread out over many years and there are safeguards built in.......cut" "cut.... And many agree with me and many don't. But what I don't do is get personal as Lefties like you always do. Being 'blinkered' is to fail to see the wider picture and acknowledge facts. I think that applies to you and your leftie mates far more accurately than myself. Its like those 13 years never happened for people like you,....cut" Given that even Cameron acknowledges Labour now occupy the centre traditional Tory ground ....who are these left wingers you keep referring to,is it some communist plot from the cold war or just anyone who doesn't vote liberal or Tory ? " Sorry my bad. When someone sings the praises of a Labour government and criticises a Coalition government I take it they are to the left of the political spectrum. Hence my calling them 'Lefties'. I called them Socialists the other week and got blasted. So here is the news: Labour is neither 'Leftist' or 'Socialist'.. 
Cold war?..nice link ... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Damn, where is Wishy when you need him ...;-)" Its OK I am here fighting the Righties corner ...although G & T and others are batting well ...lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Damn, where is Wishy when you need him ...;-) Its OK I am here fighting the Righties corner ...although G & T and others are batting well ...lol " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" there is nothing to stop you from for example a campaign for people to buy "british produced products"... and make it aware that you are helping your fellow country people, which is what they do in the US, and Japan, and China...." Totally agree..but 'buy British' what exactly?..apart from home made Jam and Cheese at country fairs theres fuck all British left to buy..we import so much..too much, but what if we didnt, we would still be knackered as there are no British companies making decent products worth having anyway...If we didnt want to buy a radio or TV ..Microwave even a car from a foreign company we wouldnt have anything.. As I said before..we have been become a nation of shopkeepers again...but this them we are selling imported wares.. The country is finished as a global force | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why on earth would a bank lend money to anyone right now . It was due to lending to people going bust they got into trouble and that was when money was flowing freely .too many people are low life stealing scum bags . No one should be borrowing to expand , if they have a good business they will have income then save ! It is far too acceptable to borrow and even worse it is cited as a solution the term is leverage and it is greedy and dangerous . if these small business think they deserve to expand may I suggest the directors place their own money at risk as for injecting money into economy , not yet ! We still owe far to much , giving, money away tax breaks will not stimulate anything , it is a state of mind that needs to change and that will take time . Stimulus must only be given on the way out and we are no where near yet , the government know this .token cash give away will only reduce the amount of cash we have to spend on essentials and debt reduction and if you think the banks are so rich, and greedy put money where mouth is and buy their shares oddly enough by all of us buying shares the county would recover but no we sell and as the countries wealth is under pinned by assets ie house and shares . dont entirely agree there my friend. i borrowed money to expand many years ago during the last recession because i had a solid business with full order books i couldnt fulfil without the investment to buy equipment and raw materials. it was bloody hard and i put 60% of the money in myself and borrowed the rest heavily secured on my family home and my business. But because the business model was solid the banks lent the money. i now employ 95 people all of whom earning above average salary with an annual turnover of nearly £10 mil. I borrowed £65k by the way and put in £80k of my own compnay cash reserve. its not wrong to borrow to invest if the business plan supports it, its only wrong to borrow if you cant justify it, and thats where the banks went wrong before. i work as a small business mentor and i have at least 5 companies i work with who are in a position to grow their business if they had cash flow injection but the banks dont want to know. we are chasing private equity investors now who all think the investments are sound and cant understand why the bansk wont lend on it. one company has a comfirmed order for goods totally £2million but they cant fulfil it because they need to purchase raw materials, buy 1 new machine and employ 4 people. They need £160k to do it. yet their bank has said no. They are currently in profit and have been for years, they show steady growth, run a tight ship and this order would catapult them forward. yet no dice from the bank. there are pleny of companies looking to grow and employ people and the only way for them is to borrow the money to start with."
Excellent point.
Lets hope the new fund that came onstream last month will stop that nonsense. Banks will be able to borrow at Government interest levels as long as they pass it on to firms like yourself and the one you mention.
Of course proper credit vetting must take place but the banks are in a cash hoarding mode and not in a lending mode. Maybe they learnt their lessons after all. Not that it helps those crying out for financing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"ha ha ha hahaha,, . are we forgetting the schools,and the hospitals,oooops. i would expect nothing less,from those who suffer selective amnesia.
Oh sorry you said 'manufacturing'. Schools and hospitals are 'Infrastructure' so no 'selective amnesia' here just someone not using the same English that I do....
Now are these the schools and hospitals that were built using PFI where private investors pay for the project and not the Brown Treasury? And the same PFI projects that the Treasury negotiated and that nearly destroyed London Underground and are now causing NHS Trusts to go bankrupt because of the contracts the Treasury foisted on them? Yes I do believe it was. Brown couldn't fund them because he had spent all the money som he did his 'Smoke and mirrors' trick, got someone else to pay for it but took the credit. The man was a con artist pure and simple. "due to gordon browns initiatives,millions of people in this country,who would otherwise be out of work,are working.apparently they are infrastructioning schools and hospitals. you say he spent all the money,although not quite as much as,greece,spain,italy,ireland,etc etc. although he did make mistakes,he still left britain in a healthier financial position,than most of our european counterparts. as for the present tory government,they are doing such a good job,ed miliband has a better than good chance,of being our next prime minister.two years ago even dynamo the magician couldn't have made that trick believable,that'll be those smoke and mirrors again mate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Charlie2012 you are without a doubt the master of selective amnesia Maggie let big business run amok oh and deregulated the banks even before the world knew who Gordon was. OK simple question. Where and when did Maggie deregulate the banks? Give us a link or give facts. You can't because she didn't. She opened up the Financial Markets not the banks. And big business has always 'run amok' no news there. British industry was damaged far more by lack of investment than unions, in the 7os when I was an apprentice we were using machinery from Victorian times while the rest of the world including the far east was investing in modern machinery and the wages and conditions were terrible although huge profits were being made Now this may come as a surprise but I agree with you. And I was a £5 a week apprenticed Jig & Tool maker. British Industry was badly managed, failed to invest but was strangled by militant unions and you couldn't get better examples than 'Red Robbo' and British Leyland. I saw at first hand how militant unions worked and it was not a nice place to be. strange how every one of your posts always blames GB for whatever the topic is at the time I have never saw a more blinkered person than you in these forums, you dont happen to be David Cameron below that helmet? No need to exaggerate! Its not strange to respond to people when they make statements with which I disagree. As you do. But it is very strange of you to say 'every one of your posts always blames GB'. I post on a variety of Threads! But GB has to come into it when people blame the new Coalition government in isolation and fail to mention the 13 years of what GB did. Its called balanced debate. A more blinkered person? I challenge people on their views and offer a different perspective. And many agree with me and many don't. But what I don't do is get personal as Lefties like you always do. Being 'blinkered' is to fail to see the wider picture and achnowledge facts. I think that applies to you and your leftie mates far more accurately than myself. Its like those 13 years never happened for people like you, Ed Millifuckwit and Ed Ballsup! Please debate. Lets leave the personal stuff out of it." Charlie2012 you just contradicted youself as calling me a leftie is personal, so I am a leftie as I dont agree with your views? you know nothing about me and my views I dont go around saying one party is 100% right and another is 100% wrong as you seem to do and as for Gordon and new labour they can hardly be called left wing they are closer to the Tories than any other party maybe thats why they messed up so much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ooh am i a Leftie or centre left / socialist liberal with the odd bit of a 'right wing' stance on certain issues..?? probably a bit of each tbh.. to tie oneself to any particular political ideology to such an extent that you cant see what is going on at any present time is a tad naive and blinkered.. all political parties cock during their tenure, twas ever thus.. btw, does anyone know what the current incumbants economic policy is?" No nobody does including himself | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ooh am i a Leftie or centre left / socialist liberal with the odd bit of a 'right wing' stance on certain issues..?? probably a bit of each tbh.. to tie oneself to any particular political ideology to such an extent that you cant see what is going on at any present time is a tad naive and blinkered.. all political parties cock during their tenure, twas ever thus.. btw, does anyone know what the current incumbants economic policy is?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Given that even Cameron acknowledges Labour now occupy the centre traditional Tory ground ....who are these left wingers you keep referring to " The Labour Party may tell everyone they've moved to the centre ground but unionism is woven into the very fabric of the Labour Party and they'd daren't expel them as they'll lose swathes of support across the country. Labour are not a centre party, not by a long shot, they're just trying to make themselves more appealing in the place where they've lost ground to the Libdems and the Tories, as they know their safe seats in the North are virtually untouchable (you could pin a red rosette on a donkey here in Gateshead and it would get elected). Scottish Nationalism is playing a very strong role in British politics at the moment as the referendum for scottish independence is in 2013 and if Scotland vote to leave the UK then Labour will lose 40 MPs instantly, whereas the Tories have just 1 MP in Scotland (LibDems have 11). Miliband knows he has to combat a possible Scottish break and he knows he stands no chance of winning in 2015 without his Scottish Labour MPs, so he has to move the party (or be seen to move the party) to the centre ground and hit the LibDems in their traditional heartlands. The problem he faces is if Scotland doesn't vote for independence but Labour support in Scotland moves to the SNP because he's moved the party away from it's traditional roots in Socialism. Tough call, and you have to tip your hat to Cameron who pushed Salmond into a referendum as early as possible. He wins whichever way it goes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"cut... Scottish Nationalism is playing a very strong role in British politics at the moment as the referendum for scottish independence is in 2013 and if Scotland vote to leave the UK then Labour will lose 40 MPs instantly, whereas the Tories have just 1 MP in Scotland (LibDems have 11). Miliband knows he has to combat a possible Scottish break and he knows he stands no chance of winning in 2015 without his Scottish Labour MPs, so he has to move the party (or be seen to move the party) to the centre ground and hit the LibDems in their traditional heartlands. The problem he faces is if Scotland doesn't vote for independence but Labour support in Scotland moves to the SNP because he's moved the party away from it's traditional roots in Socialism. Tough call, and you have to tip your hat to Cameron who pushed Salmond into a referendum as early as possible. He wins whichever way it goes." lol wishy your forgetting Cleggy the anchor..i quote todays Telegraph... "With the Tories now facing a mountainous struggle to secure an overall majority at an election on current boundaries, and the Lib Dems facing annihilation whatever the layout of the constituencies, neither side will be in a hurry to go to the polls. But they increasingly resemble a married couple trapped in a loveless marriage, kept together not by hope, but fear." Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned !!!,the Tories shafted them on a pr-agreed coalition policy. I see a lib -lab pact (thats if labour dont get a outright majority) at the next election and the Tories on the opposition benches again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" lol wishy your forgetting Cleggy the anchor..i quote todays Telegraph... "With the Tories now facing a mountainous struggle to secure an overall majority at an election on current boundaries, and the Lib Dems facing annihilation whatever the layout of the constituencies, neither side will be in a hurry to go to the polls. But they increasingly resemble a married couple trapped in a loveless marriage, kept together not by hope, but fear." Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned !!!,the Tories shafted them on a pr-agreed coalition policy. I see a lib -lab pact (thats if labour dont get a outright majority) at the next election and the Tories on the opposition benches again." That's an interesting prediction. The very thought of another coalition government may well force people to vote very strongly for either Blue or Red and not risk a coalition with any Lib-Dem or Monster Raving Loony voting. Then there is the Boris question... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" lol wishy your forgetting Cleggy the anchor..i quote todays Telegraph... "With the Tories now facing a mountainous struggle to secure an overall majority at an election on current boundaries, and the Lib Dems facing annihilation whatever the layout of the constituencies, neither side will be in a hurry to go to the polls. But they increasingly resemble a married couple trapped in a loveless marriage, kept together not by hope, but fear." Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned !!!,the Tories shafted them on a pr-agreed coalition policy. I see a lib -lab pact (thats if labour dont get a outright majority) at the next election and the Tories on the opposition benches again. That's an interesting prediction. The very thought of another coalition government may well force people to vote very strongly for either Blue or Red and not risk a coalition with any Lib-Dem or Monster Raving Loony voting. Then there is the Boris question..." playing a bit of a smart game our Boris, his star shines brightly atm and if the coalition does collapse there will probably be a challenge against our dave.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned !!!,the Tories shafted them on a pr-agreed coalition policy. I see a lib -lab pact (thats if labour dont get a outright majority) at the next election and the Tories on the opposition benches again." A Lib-Lab pact requires MPs of both parties to form it - and LibDem MPs will be a rarity after 2015. The next General Election will be a straight scrap between Labour and the Conservatives, as I said after the Uni fees fiasco the LibDems have lost the support of an entire generation and I'd be surprised if Clegg retained his seat in Sheffield tbh (although he probably will). The Tories always knew their first term in office after 13 years of Labour rule would be tough. They knew we were in a recession, facing a double dip, and an electorate that had grown used to a Labour govt and weren't fully supportive of the Coalition, but, as with all sitting governments, they push the unpopular policies in the first half of government and buy votes back in the run in to the next election. Mark my words, after 2013 we'll see tax breaks, fuel price freezes, N.I. reductions, and a whole raft of other feelgood policies, but we'll be out of recession too and they tend to be cyclical also. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned !!!,the Tories shafted them on a pr-agreed coalition policy. I see a lib -lab pact (thats if labour dont get a outright majority) at the next election and the Tories on the opposition benches again. A Lib-Lab pact requires MPs of both parties to form it - and LibDem MPs will be a rarity after 2015. The next General Election will be a straight scrap between Labour and the Conservatives, as I said after the Uni fees fiasco the LibDems have lost the support of an entire generation and I'd be surprised if Clegg retained his seat in Sheffield tbh (although he probably will). The Tories always knew their first term in office after 13 years of Labour rule would be tough. They knew we were in a recession, facing a double dip, and an electorate that had grown used to a Labour govt and weren't fully supportive of the Coalition, but, as with all sitting governments, they push the unpopular policies in the first half of government and buy votes back in the run in to the next election. Mark my words, after 2013 we'll see tax breaks, fuel price freezes, N.I. reductions, and a whole raft of other feelgood policies, but we'll be out of recession too and they tend to be cyclical also. "just when after 2013 do you think this will begin to end? cant see it before 2014 at the very earliest and it will not be overnight... according to most tory supporters on here labour were piss poor and the country was in such a parlous state financially before the May 2010 election.. yet they still failed to achieve a majority, which lets be honest after 13 yrs of any party in power should be a given.. the electorate wont just blame the liberals.. pretty obvious that the tories want the liberals to be the whipping boys n gals by 2015, with as said lots of the usual tax reductions etc to sway people over.. just dont see it somehow, and atm labour dont have a credible leader.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
