Any government is of course subject to global economic influence, but when we see a negative trend continuing for over four years, I think we would have to lay at largely at the door of no.11 Downing Street, regardless of what was the initial cause.
Even if the global economic influence is still continuing after 4 years? 😯
Of course it wasn't "fine" under Conservative governments. It wasn't "fine" under any other kind of government either, of whatever stripe.
And you know what, it never will be. The only question now is, how can a better living be enabled for those at the bottom of the pile. To whatever degree.
The idea that economics can be directed and controlled by governments is a complete red herring. Especially now that the economy Is globally based.
Anybody care to stop bickering about 20th century politics and deal with the actual issue?
Even if the global economic influence is still continuing after 4 years?
Global influences don't require the chancellor to protect the interests of millionaire pensioners by making the working-poor poorer.
At the same time as pretty much everyones wages have been stagnating , at best, but mainly falling, the people at the top have been laughing their tits off as they hoover up ALL the proceeds of any economic recovery.
And that, in a nutshell, whether they state it or not, is what the Tories always achieve, as that is their goal.
And before someone points out that inequality gathered pace under Labour .... I know. But I doubt as much as it would have done under the Tories
But the fact is that both main parties just offer more of the same. One looks a bit hand-wringing about having to further **** the poor over to please their corporate masters. The other lot are loving every minute of it!!!! Check out Osbournes slimy, smug, dead-eyed grin as he was delivering the good news to the rich party faithful yesterday. But the level of obvious enjoyment they're getting out of it is now the only thing that distinguishes them from one another
Utterly depressing. Is it any wonder the population is so disengaged, and is even prepared to give a spanner like Farage a try as an alternative.
"Anybody care to stop bickering about 20th century politics and deal with the actual issue?"
No, huh?
Bit of waste of time, this thread. I preferred it when the dog chased it's tail in the religious threads.
I'm off. Have a nice day everybody.
Only if it suits your political agenda - ie tories stressing labour did the recession [ as if] and Labour stressing they did not get us out of it [ as if]
All we can discuss is whether there policies helped or exacerbated the global conditions
if you expect that nuanced a debate on here you may be a tad disappointed
Any government is of course subject to global economic influence, but when we see a negative trend continuing for over four years, I think we would have to lay at largely at the door of no.11 Downing Street, regardless of what was the initial cause.
True. Comes with the job to a certain extent. I must admit though, when I look at the (simplistic) graph I posted, and look for trends from the start of the crash onwards, I can't detect any significant worsening post 2010. I believe real wages have now crossed back into growth, so the trend may actually be turning up (EDIT: or about to dive back underneath to continue the negative trend!)
The argument I guess is whether wages would have flatlined for so long post 2008 if Labour's proposed economic policies had been applied. Really hard to model that one given the circumstances and the relative similarity of economic policies.
I suppose the only other point is that wage growth (or fall) is just one indicator of overall economic health (two, if you count its relationship to inflation), albeit one of the most important in electoral terms.
All we can discuss is whether there policies helped or exacerbated the global conditions
and as molgrips pointed out upthread, nobody really knows whether a government of a (slightly) different flavour would have done better or worse.
Just as ridiculous to blame the decrease in wages over the last few years on the current government as it is to blame the crash on Labour. If you want to play political point scoring, the fall in wages under the current government is less than the average difference between the increase in wages under governments from 79 to 97 and governments from 97 to 2010 - in fact having looked at those figures going back to the war, it's interesting to note that this appears to be the first Conservative government which hasn't achieved higher average wage growth than both the preceding and following Labour governments (clearly it's actually the Lib Dem's fault 😉 )
Bit pointless arguing over who caused what.
But is anyone really going to defend tax cuts for the highest earners combined with cutting benefits for low-paid workers?
IMO there is no way to support this measure without using the phrase 'speaking as a selfish ****...'
But is anyone really going to defend tax cuts for the highest earners combined with cutting benefits for low-paid workers?
Apparently so. Tories are great, aren't they? Bless their cold, devoid of empathy, price of everything, value of nothing, selfish, grasping, entitled, nasty, sociopathic little hearts
Bit pointless arguing over who caused what.
Of course, which is why I pointed that out first before engaging in pointless statistical manipulation 😉
The Tories have been in power more than any other party in the last 100 years
True but didn't labour have 13 years recently to have a go of it ?
How did that work out ?
Tories are great, aren't they? Bless their cold, devoid of empathy, price of everything, value of nothing, selfish, grasping, entitled, nasty, sociopathic little hearts
True, and Labour have proved a few times over that they are incapable of running an economy, except into the ground, so what do we do ?
Go right and the little men get screwed ....
Go left and the little men get screwed ....
Would be nice to try something else for a change
True but didn't labour have 13 years recently to have a go of it ?How did that work out ?
Serious question? I think the first term was mostly a success, with badly-needed investment into schools and hospitals, the minimum wage, Freedom of Information act, and of course the Good Friday Agreement. All delivered with a stable and growing economy.
Blair could've been an excellent domestic Prime Minister were it not for his pathetic Messiah complex.
Would be nice to try something else for a change
Wouldn't it just? It says a lot about the crisis in modern British parliamentary democracy, that we're all so utterly fed up with the same cycle of Tory heartlessness, then labour economic incompetence, that shedloads of people are considering this as an alternative worth giving a go....
[img] 
[/img]
Surely the most damning indictment imaginable on the utter failure of the present 2 party system.
Surely the most damning indictment imaginable on the utter failure of the present 2 party system
I have a dystopian vision of UKIP holding the balance of power, following a hung parliament next May.
with badly-needed investment into schools and hospitals
PFI ? hmm not sure, but it was desperately needed and had to be financed somehow.
Unfortunately I think you need to look at the whole term, as I was told by my history teacher, how would Hitler have been viewed if he had died in 1937 ? - probably fairly favourably as he was bringing them out of a long recession and restoring pride in the German people .....
we're all so utterly fed up with the same cycle of [s]Tory[/s] Labour heartlessness, then [s]labour[/s] Tory economic incompetence
The Tories just don't bother to hide their heartlessness, and do a better job at pretending to be economically competent.
Edit: though I shouldn't have bothered, seeing how the thread has just been Godwinned. Hitler did do a good job with the railways, didn't he?
how would Hitler have been viewed if he had died in 1937 ? - probably fairly favourably as he was bringing them out of a long recession and restoring pride in the German people .....
😯 And we're there!
Not sure all of Hitler's domestic policies pre 1937 would have quite stood up to much scrutiny, BTW.
Ransos - I think the way that Farage made an attempt last week to woo traditional labour voters, means he doesn't think that impossible. If the Labour party complacently think UKIP are just a Tory problem (and it looks like that is exactly what they think) then I reckon they're in for one hell of a wake up call next year! It shows how out of touch the parties are.
They go on about policies, but a UKIP vote isn't necessarily a vote for specific policies.(they haven't got any really, apart from the dog-whistle immigration and Europe ones). In a lot of cases its a vote that just says a great big **** YOU!!! to the two main parties. I don't think either of them actually get this!
UKIP are going to cause chaos at the next election. They may win the odd seat, they may not. But their presence is going to disrupt normal voting to the extent that the UKIP vote will skew electoral results all over the country. And not just in leafy shires either.
But its all their own fault. By their arrogant disdain for the electorate, they've created Farage. Now they'll have to deal with the fallout. In a logical world you'd think that'd involve, listening to people, and considering an alternative to their cosy neo-liberal consensus, that only benefits a diminishing band of people.
Will it though? I think we know the answer to that
PFI ? hmm not sure, but it was desperately needed and had to be financed somehow.Unfortunately I think you need to look at the whole term, as I was told by my history teacher, how would Hitler have been viewed if he had died in 1937 ? - probably fairly favourably as he was bringing them out of a long recession and restoring pride in the German people .....
My post made specific reference to Blair's subsequent shortcomings, but whatever they were, a comparison to Nazi Germany is more than a little bit daft, no?
Ransos - I think the way that Farage made an attempt last week to woo traditional labour voters, means he doesn't think that impossible. If the Labour party complacently think UKIP are just a Tory problem (and it looks like that is exactly what they think) then I reckon they're in for one hell of a wake up call next year! It shows how out of touch the parties are.
To the point that ordinary people will actually vote for a party more against their interests than even the worst excesses of the conservatives...
Labour have proved a few times over that they are incapable of running an economy, except into the ground, so what do we do ?
Only if you think that labour caused OPEC to quadruple oil prices and the global economic slump triggered by the US sub prime market would this be true - is this really what you wish to claim? I
As for the later you would also have to think that the even lighter regulation touch of the Tories, who were also matching labour spending plans, would have been better in terms of our reliance on financial markets and the probity of the players involved.I think that would be a stretch even for the bluest of tories to claim.
Its nonsense to claim that labour caused either of these as it was clearly massive external factors.
Hitler did do a good job with the railways, didn't he?
that was Mussolini and so typical of your manipulation of the facts 😉
To the point that ordinary people will actually vote for a party more against their interests than even the worst excesses of the conservatives...
Sadly yes as many voters are too stupid to realise he is a Tory through and through and to the right of thatcher [ well we had Hitler]
At the same time as pretty much everyones wages have been stagnating , at best, but mainly falling, the people at the top have been laughing their tits off as they hoover up ALL the proceeds of any economic recovery.
@binners what I am going to say is a simplification but basically the lower levels of the workforce is being undercut by cheap foreign manufacturing whilst he businesses ownership/management/design continues in the UK. So the benefits of the recovery flow to the ownership/management/design.
The fact is most on here wish to save a few £ buying bike parts online (foreign owned website, often no UK VAT as EU taxes paid elsewhere, far east manufacture) rather than support a LBS which at provides local employment, taxes and business rates. Personally I'd like to see online sales taxes which mean it's uneconomic to buy stuff online vs a LBS.
"Global influences don't require the chancellor to protect the interests of millionaire pensioners by making the working-poor poorer."
Most pensioners aren't millionaires and even those that are will be paying up to 60% effective tax depending on their annual income. The majority of pensioners are on modest incomes - they have been protected. The "working poor" are now paying significantly less tax - the annual allowance is now nearly £10K a year which means something like 2.5m of the lowest paid are now paying little or no tax.
These threads are so predictable:
1. Headline grabbing title about nasty Tories
2. Photo of the Dave or George (or both) laughing
3. References to the privileged or millionaire mates
What never seems to flow the other way is that Ed Milliband is more of a toff than David Cameron, having had a a completely private education, an extremely privileged life made possible through family connections, never having worked in a normal job and currently living in a £2.5m house - not exactly a man of the people.
Fortunately for Ed Miliband, the public would rather engage in trading stupid photos of politicians / name calling than actually examining whether the claims of the Labour party are anything more than wishful thinking, as Radio 4 perfectly illustrates by unpicking Labour's two latest promises on the deficit and secondly to "save the NHS. The latter actually turns out to be a commitment to increase spending less in real terms than Margaret Thatcher did during a period in which Labour say the NHS was ruined by underinvestment:
Paying down the deficit: 13 mins 30 secs http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hywws
NHS - 16 minutes in:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04hywws
The facts are irrelevant though - which is why we'll almost certainly have Ed Miliband as the UK's most ineffective Prime Minister since Gordon Brown. And look how well that turned out..
We are on this UKIP/Farage is to the extreme right thing again? Really this view will see UKIP only get stronger, people haven't been taking them seriously for 2 years now and this has allowed them to prosper. As farage says he is parking his tanks on labour's lawn. Strong immigration control plus tax cuts for average working class people will attract a lot of votes.
well we had Hitler
Yeah, but he was a Socialist.
Robdixon, you complain about headline grabbing etc and the resort to:
What never seems to flow the other way is that Ed Milliband is more of a toff than David Cameron, having had a a completely private education, an extremely privileged life made possible through family connections, never having worked in a normal job and currently living in a £2.5m house - not exactly a man of the people.
Who cares about his upbringing and how much his house costs. There are many other reasons I wouldnt vote for him.
Most pensioners aren't millionaires and even those that are will be paying up to 60% effective tax depending on their annual income. The majority of pensioners are on modest incomes - they have been protected. The "working poor" are now paying significantly less tax - the annual allowance is now nearly £10K a year which means something like 2.5m of the lowest paid are now paying little or no tax.
1. It is precisely because most pensioners are on modest incomes that I referred to millionaires - they are the one who gain from the proposals.
2. I refer you to the earlier graphs on average wages.
What never seems to flow the other way is that Ed Milliband is more of a toff than David Cameron, having had a a completely private education, an extremely privileged life made possible through family connections, never having worked in a normal job and currently living in a £2.5m house - not exactly a man of the people.
You're claiming that Miliband is more of a toff than an old-Etonian Bullingdon man who is the son of a tax-dodging millionaire? Riiight.
The majority of pensioners are on modest incomes - they have been protected.
They've been protected because pensioners vote.
The 'working poor' in their ghastly northern hellholes probably won't vote Tory anyway so who gives a shit?
You can dress it up how you like - but you forgot to start your post with 'speaking as a selfish....'
Who cares about his upbringing and how much his house costs. There are many other reasons I wouldnt vote for him.
Exactly. It's about as relevant as pictures of Dave and Gideon in their Bullingdon get-up, which I think was the point being made.
The latter actually turns out to be a commitment to increase spending less in real terms than Margaret Thatcher did during a period in which Labour say the NHS was ruined by underinvestment:
[url= http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/data-and-charts/history-nhs-spending-uk ]
but as percentage of national income it was pretty static under Mrs T[/url]
that was Mussolini and so typical of your manipulation of the facts
You're being very unfair. Hitler ran a very efficient transportation system which carried millions of people across Europe by train.
Not sure all of Hitler's domestic policies pre 1937 would have quite stood up to much scrutiny, BTW.
I will def bow to anyones knowledge as my own knowledge of that period is not that great.
I wasn't comparing Tony to Hitler in anyway, it was more the first term thing - perhaps thatcher would have been a better one ?
I refer you to the earlier graphs on average wages.
Average wages which includes lots of people who aren't the working poor? You're using that to prove that the working poor are worse off?
I'm not going to try and argue whether or not the working poor are poorer, but that graph provides no evidence one way or the other.
robdixon - more of a toff than Cameron? Hmmmmmmmmm I think you may want to check out his family history.
But I take your point. I don't think anyones holding up the labour party as the answer to anything. Far from it. Thats the point. We've got a Tory government that makes Thatcher (... and again) look like a bleeding heart liberal. And an insipid, spineless opposition who in the end are bankrolled, and represent the interests of, exactly the same people. John Harris described Milliband perfectly. 'A Book Club whose political antennae don't pick up signals outside North London
The point is that both main parties now offer exactly the same. The same bankrupt Chicago school, Milton Friedman economic bollocks,m where we're all just slaves to 'The Market'.
Which is why everyone is so fed up with them they're considering a vote for Farage as an actual alternative. Seriously? Its depressing just howe out of touch the main political parties are. They have more idea of what its like to live on the surface of mars than they do on say a northern council estate
I don't think most of them have any more idea what it's like to live in rural Worcestershire or indeed anywhere outside the London bubble.
The other trouble we have is the first past the post system which grossly favours the incumbent political parties - Living in Derby it is fairly pointless voting if you aren't a labour supporter as Margaret Becket had a 30% majority in the 2010 elections -
Perhaps we do need change - a PR system devolved to a county level like Switzerland anyone ?
As farage says he is parking his tanks on labour's lawn. Strong immigration control plus tax cuts for average working class people will attract a lot of votes.
Indeed. The [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26184146 ]Wythenshawe by-election[/url] should have set labour alarm bells ringing. It didn't. They're still absolutely refusing to engage with matters that working class voters have genuine legitimate concerns about. Labour just refuses to even discuss it - remember Browns 'bigoted woman' comment. Thats still the attitude within labour. The Tory's are scared shitless to get into a debate on the subject too.
Farage on the other hand, will happily talk about it all day. He'll offer quick easy (non-workable) solutions to complicated problems. And while he's doing that, he won't be getting the rest of his (extremely dodgy, and unworkable) policies put under any scrutiny
UKIP are going to take big chunks of labours votes in the North. As labour just found out in Scotland, their core vote has wised up and just doesn't believe that a vote for labour will do them any more good than a vote for the Tories. So why bother?
*waits for andyfla to cave in to popular momentum and vote for Margaret Beckett* 😆
Anybody care to examine the global situation rather than focus on local class war rhetoric?
Yes, please - and I'll do a bit of history as well.
We are getting to the point where we are fundamentally uncompetitive as a nation. Ease of movement for global companies is now easier than ever (not necessarily easy per se, but easier than ever). We don't make stuff any more - or more accurately we are used to an excessive expectation of the salary we should receive for making stuff. So the corporations go elsewhere. There are many shining examples of where this isn't the case, but they are beacons in the dark rather than floodlights.
So, we are hobbled when it comes to the 'dirty' work of making stuff. So we choose, rightly, to differentiate ourselves by nurturing a highly educated, highly motivated working population who can compete in the more rarified air of high tech and service sectors. But we flinch from educating people properly because we are afraid of carrying that through properly. With university attendance being an elite 10% decided on by ability alone we go for the 'entitlement' approach. We don't force parents to take their kids' schooling seriously because it is too much bother and it doesn't win elections.
So there you have it. We built much of the world we see today, but unfortunately we expect a "thank you" from the rest of said world and to rest on our laurels that were earned in the very distant past. Meanwhile a lot of world is getting on, accepting that they are at the mercy of market forces, making painful decisions and moving up the league as a result.
We sit in our offices, houses and cars without so much as a moment of thought as to whether this lifestyle is sustainable, or even deserved. Governments seek to put the brakes on reality as much as possible. Every 10-15 years the shit hits the fan globally, the UK's position becomes untenable and there is a step-change downwards in living standards.
Until we realise that governments are not really in charge, then we are doomed to this cycle of crisis aversion followed by real crisis followed by acceptance of a demotion in the world 'league'.
Solutions? Well, overthrowing global capitalism would be one. Or accepting that we need to make ourselves competitive again would be another. For my money (and as a tax payer that is not a throwaway line) we need to get real about the state of education and skills in this country, recognise that this needs improving and that some difficult decisions would need to be made, and get on with it.
The majority of pensioners are on modest incomes
True but their guarantee is double that of a single person looking for work - yet they remain protected. Explain please?
What never seems to flow the other way is that Ed Milliband is more of a toff than David Cameron,
That is because most of us are educated and aware of the facts.
Wow not even the Daily Mail would have the front to make that claim
Hitler ran a very efficient transportation system which carried millions of people across Europe by train.
We may just have reached the boundaries of good taste.
Just received confirmation of my 1% payrise. Less than £20 per month before tax. Which I know is more than many may get.
Suspect at some point this weekend I will have to listen to my parents complaining about their pensions, which total more than my income. All in it together my arse!
Suspect at some point this weekend I will have to listen to my parents complaining about their pensions, which total more than my income. All in it together my arse!
Careful - you don't want to be written out of the will.
*waits for andyfla to cave in to popular momentum and vote for Margaret Beckett*
Good god man I have standards ! I couldn't vote for that horrible woman if I tried !
Suspect at some point this weekend I will have to listen to my parents complaining about their pensions, which total more than my income.
what's wrong with that?
Average wages which includes lots of people who aren't the working poor? You're using that to prove that the working poor are worse off?
If the working poor aren't worse off, as you seem to be implying, then people on average and high incomes must be. Do you think that's the case? You might find it useful to look at the ONS statistics on average household incomes and total tax take. It's quite illuminating.
Suspect after care costs there will be nothing to inherit!
I did like your earlier post btw, some harsh truths in there. We probably do not "earn" our lifestyle looking at the wider world around us.
what's wrong with that?
The complaining bit presumably.
If the working poor aren't worse off, as you seem to be implying
I wasn't implying anything of the sort, as I made clear in the next sentence which you snipped, simply that those figures didn't prove anything.
Though thanks for the ONS suggestion, I found this:
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/household-income/the-effects-of-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income/2011-2012/etb-stats-bulletin-2011-12.html
Disposable incomes have fallen since the start of the economic downturn, with average equivalised income falling by £1,200 since 2007/08 in real terms. The fall in income has been largest for the richest fifth of households (6.8%). In contrast, after accounting for inflation and household composition, average income for the poorest fifth has grown over this period (6.9%).
But is anyone really going to defend tax cuts for the highest earners combined with cutting benefits for low-paid workers?
@grum The tax cut for pensioners will cost £150m. The benefits freeze will save £3bn. You can't compare the two in terms of financial impact, the big savings need to be made. Even the Labour "mansion" tax proposal would only raise £1.5bn which is half the amount required to maintain the benefit payments. We have to cut spending, there is no other choice. The Labour party has agreed this too.
Suspect at some point this weekend I will have to listen to my parents complaining about their pensions, which total more than my income. All in it together my arse!
@MoreCash Well they worked their whole lives to pay for those. You have your career ahead of you and can hope for pay rises and promotions.
Solutions? Well, overthrowing global capitalism would be one.
As demonstrated here, there are many idiots who have been brainwashed into hating the poor and worshipping the wealthy to do anything revolutionary. Anyone who votes Tory who isn't wealthy is just an oxygen thief.
So the richest get a tax cut from 50p to 45p in the pound, and this is paid for by freezing tax credits of low income WORKING families.
What you've got to remember is that to get the rich to work harder, you need to give them more, and to get the poor to work harder, you need to give them less.
Classic Right-wing ideology right there.
One thing worth noting in Gideons speech yesterday, no doubt as an effort to sound like they weren't [i]just[/i] punishing the poor, was yet another mention of his commitment to closing tax loopholes, and strengthening laws to ensure tax paid on business done in Britain, is paid in Britain. Particularly now they've significantly lowered the rate of Corporation Tax.
Seriously.... how many times have we heard him make vague noises about this? Loads of times! Its been going on since they got in! And what has he [i]actually[/i] done about it? Well other than making a stack of HMRC staff redundant... nowt.
And to be honest I doubt the whole redundancy thing has improved matters much. Maybe I'm missing something?
What you've got to remember is that to get the rich to work harder, you need to give them more...Classic Right-wing ideology right there.
OTOH to ignore the idea that increasing the highest tax rate can result in decreased tax receipts is classic left-wing ideology. Note that as with most of the stuff on this thread I'm sitting on the fence and not commenting on whether it's true - however your position seems to be to ignore it or dismiss it as unimportant without proving that it isn't true.
Seriously.... how many times have we heard him make vague noises about this? Loads of times! Its been going on since they got in! And what has he actually done about it?
I'll refrain from doing "clever" editing and simply point out that they all make noises about closing tax loopholes and about efficiency savings without ever seemingly doing anything. It seems to be one of the standard easy ways to make unfunded spending promises. The trouble is it seems the people who pull the strings benefit from tax loopholes - surely otherwise it wouldn't be all that difficult to vastly simplify the tax system.
I object to my parents complaining that their pensions are only going up at twice the rate of my earnings. When my dad alone gets more in pension then I get at work. While they moan at the possible loss of their winter heating allowance and free bus passes which they apparently "earned" while working, even though tbey didn't exist when tbey were working.
I object to them being able to joke about sticking £100 a month in their grandchildrens savings accounts despite their meagre pension increases.
Actually, I don't really object to any of it. For the middle one of 9 kids of a merchant seaman, who's brothers went down pits or into shipyards, my dad worked incredibly hard to get what he has achieved, through crises as big or bigger than this one.
But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
Anyone who votes Tory who isn't wealthy is just an oxygen thief.
Why thank you, and the same to you.
and has a bike habit to maintain ..... 😀But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
The one thing that does need changing is a simplified tax system. It's not an easy decision as it would put people out of work, but it needs to be done regardless.
But if they think times are hard at the moment, they want to try having two kids to feed, cloth etc!
Really when food and clothes prices have fallen.
[quote=grum ]The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
and the Labour party is incompetence dressed up as social responsibility?
hard place and a rock I think.
Where's screaming lord sutch when you need him.
They are all zombie maggots.
No exception.
🙄
edit: you are merely voting for the zombie maggots that cause less damages ...
grum - Member
The Tory party is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.
Do they even bother to dress it up as some kind of ideology any more? I think this lot are quite proud of the absence of any ideology, further than their own desperate snouts-in-the-trough grasping, and heartless no-such-thing-as-society cruelty.
5 pages until we got to "no such thing as society"
Well done chaps.
[i]grum - Member
The Tory party [s]is just selfishness dressed up as some kind of ideology.[/s] I don't understand and don't want to understand.
[/i]
Prejudice from the left, oh the ironing.
Where's screaming lord sutch when you need him.
He changed his name to Farage
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work. You can't pay for the NHS and the welfare state if the economy is bust.
By the way the £3bn savings where to cost an average of £300 a family for those in work but on benefits. By my maths that means there are 10 million families on work related benefits, that doesn't seem right ?
jambalaya - MemberBy my maths that means there are 10 million families on work related benefits, that doesn't seem right ?
I'm not surprised if that is correct ...
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Just sayin'.
Prejudice from the left, oh the ironing.
Sorry yes, you want to starve the poor to help them - I was forgetting.
and now it turns out Victoria Pendleton is [i]one of them[/i]
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Nothing wrong with that. The problem is when they assume that everyone on benefits is a workshy scrounger and needs teaching a lesson.
[i]Sorry yes, you want to starve the poor to help them - I was forgetting. [/i]
Pathetic comments such as this just write you out of the conversation.
shut the door on your way out, there's a good lad.
[i]The problem is when they assume that everyone on benefits is a workshy scrounger and needs teaching a lesson. [/i]
I guess it just comes naturally to you. Oh, to be gifted like a Trolgrips is [i]gifted[/i]. Your indescriminate insult is very crude. Why can't you try to imagine that you're not the only person here with a brain. In fact, don't imagine it.
So we should make balanced, sensible comments like this eh Solo?
the left, who are too busy crying about the rich and calling for Labour to rob the rich and duff-up the companies
Shut the door on your way out, there's a good lad.
Grum.
I'm honoured that you have chosen to immitate my post. Probably the best you could do after your previous posts. Which kinda illustrates my point.
Thank you.
😀
The Tories ideology has always been to encourage and reward work.
Seeing as we're indulging in defining party ideologies in one liners. I'd say that the tory ideology is that everyone is on their own and can only help themselves and shouldn't expect any help from anyone else. The old labour ideology is pretty much the opposite: By cooperating, working together and pooling resources, everyone can be better off. The new labour ideology? Gain power by any means necessary.
Is it laughable that this thread suffers from various [s]misconceptions[/s] delusions?
That labour is left wing. That Tories encourage work. That the Tor-Lib-Lab-UKI parties have a coherent ideology
That the gov't actually has any influence over a global economy (they just take credit on the up cycle and take a kicking on the downcycle)
That professional MP's (as opposed to MP's who have actually had a profession) are competent to run the country.