Did you know there was a huge demonstration in Manchester??

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The Cons are disgrace with all these cuts, they didn't even get a majority yet think they can bring all these drastic new laws. Bring Labour back quick to save the day before the Cons have completly fucked the country up and there's no way back.
Ahhhhhhh....Oh partisans are so annoying. First, no Uk government ever gets a majority of support. Our government system is designed to pick the largest block and give them power. With a fair sprinkling of random luck about how 'largest' gets measured.

Second, there really is little difference between labour and conservatives in their implementation of government to date. They both favour the finance industry, both believe in the level of spending about what it is now. They spend their time talking up their differences rather than their much greater similarities.

I havnt noticed much in the news about protests in Manchester, which I presume is all about the Conservative party conference which is happening there right now. A reporter this morning said there are about 4000 party delegates and 7000 hangers on, including press and lobbyists. He remarked on the great contrast between life inside the conference, where apparently luxury goods companies have set up stalls, and the streets outside, where he detected increasing annoyance with the government and recession

You don't go out and buy a BMW when you can't afford one do you?
er, the modern economy assumes for its operation that, yes, people must go out and buy things they do not need and cannot afford.

Do you have any idea how dept much this administration inherited from the previous Labour govt??.!
A good deal less than the next government will inherit from this one. By the time we reach the next government, things may be so bad that the government can no longer borrow. Are you saying this means the current lot are no good?
 
Last edited:

eurotop40

Admired Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Posts
4,430
Media
0
Likes
977
Points
333
Location
Zurich (Switzerland)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
I havnt noticed much in the news about protests in Manchester, which I presume is all about the Conservative party conference which is happening there right now. ...

Pardon me, but do you - as most US americans do - think your information is really free? I don't, especially being isolated - culturally and linguistically - you can be easily fooled by the news tycoons.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
its only free if you buy it from wikipedia. Broadly i suppose I expect news in the UK to be a fair representation of the events actually happening. We do now get al jazira and russia something, for variety. If you want, I am sure you can buy into other news services and probably other free ones. I do not believe there is a secret riot going on in manchester which has been hidden from us, if only because things arent that bad yet. Yet.
 

Ryan10

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Posts
581
Media
89
Likes
2,832
Points
323
Location
England (United Kingdom)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
That's hilarious.Do you have any idea how dept much this administration inherited from the previous Labour govt??..The coalition have only been in power just over a year,so how exactl;y have they 'fucked up the country'. As for not 'even getting a majority',the last Labour govt did have a sizeable majority and still managed to give Britain the biggest national debt in history!!!!....Sounds like you want the present govt to just keep spend,spend,spending.Nice one!


The previous Labour government did a good job, they protect the rights of the working class (The backbone of the UK). All the Cons care about is looking after upper class people. The Cons even want to get rid of the NHS so people without money will just be left to die when they get a serious illness. Disgraceful!

Yes, they've been here for just over a year (which is undemocratic as no-one voted for a coalition government but I won't go into that) and they have already made the economy much worse, attemped to ruin the NHS, turned top schools into academies which will be a very bad thing for most, and of course we got the riots which they did f**k all to stop. It's only been one year, I really fear what the country will be like if this government is till here in 2014 or 2015.

Ahhhhhhh....Oh partisans are so annoying. First, no Uk government ever gets a majority of support.

Labour had a majority in 1997, 2001 and 2005 (a massive one)

Second, there really is little difference between labour and conservatives in their implementation of government to date.

Labour want oportunies for all. The Cons just want the upper classes to get on in life. That's the differance.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Labour had a majority in 1997, 2001 and 2005 (a massive one)
1997 43% of vote, 13.5 million votes. 2001 40.7% 10.7 million votes, 2005 35% 9.5 million. Not even a majority of just those who bothered to vote in any of these elections. In all cases more people did not want them to be the government than did.

Labour want oportunies for all. The Cons just want the upper classes to get on in life. That's the differance.
But as I said, whatever the rhetoric, no difference in actual implemented policies.
 
S

superbot

Guest
The previous Labour government did a good job, they protect the rights of the working class (The backbone of the UK). All the Cons care about is looking after upper class people. The Cons even want to get rid of the NHS so people without money will just be left to die when they get a serious illness. Disgraceful!

Yes, they've been here for just over a year (which is undemocratic as no-one voted for a coalition government but I won't go into that) and they have already made the economy much worse, attemped to ruin the NHS, turned top schools into academies which will be a very bad thing for most, and of course we got the riots which they did f**k all to stop. It's only been one year, I really fear what the country will be like if this government is till here in 2014 or 2015.



Labour had a majority in 1997, 2001 and 2005 (a massive one)



Labour want oportunies for all. The Cons just want the upper classes to get on in life. That's the differance.
The Conservatives want to get rid of the NHS,...since when??
Hiding behind that 'working class' claptrap pretty much sums up your arguement.We are not living in the 19c,most of the wealth of this country is generated from the middle classes and mainly from London and the Sotheast.
In case you had'nt noticed Labour are not in power any longer and the rules that put in a coalition govt are the same ones that put Labour in from 1997 onwards,so you can't slag off the electoral system in one breath and laud it the next.Besides I didn't see much evidence of working classness about the last administration,Blair and Brown two nicely university educated middle class boys leaving office millionaires!!
Again,do you have any idea how much shit Gordon Brown left us in on leaving office?? Go on youtube and look at Daniel Hannan serving up Gordon Brown a few facts!!
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Again,do you have any idea how much shit Gordon Brown left us in on leaving office?? Go on youtube and look at Daniel Hannan serving up Gordon Brown a few facts!!
To reply, not really. Do you? It is exceedingly hard to work out whether we are hopelessly and irredeemably screwed, in deep trouble, in a tricky situation, in a hyped up drama.

What specific complaints by Mr Hannan did you have in mind? Do you mean pre-crash, handling of crash or post crash? Did you feel brown should have handled the crisis differently, and if so how? Do you feel that pre-crash, Mr Browns policies differed from those of the conservative party, and if so, how?

The bankers did this to britain. The amount of money needed to restore order was directly related to UK depedence on the financial industry. The crash was caused by risky lending by banks which knew they were underwritten by governments. No individual banker was at risk of losing anything personally whatever they did. Government borrowing was significantly influenced by prevailing expert views amongst banks as to how much borrowing was affordable. The financial system caused this.
 

Ryan10

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Posts
581
Media
89
Likes
2,832
Points
323
Location
England (United Kingdom)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
1997 43% of vote, 13.5 million votes. 2001 40.7% 10.7 million votes, 2005 35% 9.5 million. Not even a majority of just those who bothered to vote in any of these elections. In all cases more people did not want them to be the government than did.


Labour won the majority of seats and that's all that matters.

The Conservatives want to get rid of the NHS,...since when??

The Cons want to 'regulate' the NHS which would mean that the poor would have to pay for it and all Labour's good work would be undone.

Hiding behind that 'working class' claptrap pretty much sums up your arguement.We are not living in the 19c,most of the wealth of this country is generated from the middle classes and mainly from London and the Sotheast.

That's because all the money is pumped into the London and the South-East while the rest of the country has been left to rot since the 1980's and Thatcher's one woman mission to destroy Northern England and the working class. I see Cameron's trying to continue her work.

In case you had'nt noticed Labour are not in power any longer and the rules that put in a coalition govt are the same ones that put Labour in from 1997

Labour won by a landslide in 1997 and certainly didn't need a coalition with the Liberals.

!Again,do you have any idea how much shit Gordon Brown left us in on leaving office?? Go on youtube and look at Daniel Hannan serving up Gordon Brown a few facts!!

Do you have any idea how much shit Thatcher (And to a lesser extent Major) left us in since leaving office? The country still hasn't recovered since her reign despite Labours good work.
 
Last edited:

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Labour won the majority of seats and that's all that matters.
Ah, you believe in dictatorship. Time was, the local squire could appoint the MP. If labour got a majority by paying enough money to local squires, that would be all that mattered? The communist party in Russia had a majority in elections for many years. No one else was allowed to stand. But what did that matter, they had a majority. No UK party has been supported by a majority of voters for a very long time.

That's because all the money is pumped into the London and the South-East while the rest of the country has been left to rot since the 1980's and Thatcher's one woman mission to destroy Northern England and the working class. I see Cameron's trying to continue her work.
I am not a conservative supporter but this is unfair. What has happened in the Uk is that traditional industries have died out and new ones arrived. The old ones tended to be near their traditional suppliers, which were coal mines and iron ore. Now we do not use coal. We do not make steel. If we do, we import it, so instead of being near a mine, a factory needs to be near a port. Most modern industry is placed near to europe, which is the biggest market. Why drive everything down from scotland or N. England?

Governments for the last 50 years have spent tax money from the south in the north. Government has tried to redistribute itself away from London to regions. DVLA in SWansea, DWP in Glasgow, etc.

Labour won by a landslide in 1997 and certainly didn't need a coalition with the Liberals.
labour 43%, conservative 31%, liberal 17% of the vote. So on that basis a lib-con coalition ought to have been able to form a coalition government with a decent majority.
 
S

superbot

Guest
Labour won the majority of seats and that's all that matters.



The Cons want to 'regulate' the NHS which would mean that the poor would have to pay for it and all Labour's good work would be undone.



That's because all the money is pumped into the London and the South-East while the rest of the country has been left to rot since the 1980's and Thatcher's one woman mission to destroy Northern England and the working class. I see Cameron's trying to continue her work.



Labour won by a landslide in 1997 and certainly didn't need a coalition with the Liberals.



Do you have any idea how much shit Thatcher (And to a lesser extent Major) left us in since leaving office? The country still hasn't recovered since her reign despite Labours good work.
You clearly haven't the faintest idea of recent our politcal and social history.When Mrs Thatcher became leader in '79 this country was on it's knees economically and socially.Under Callaghan we had strike after strike after strike after strike.We had the three day week,we had industry that hadn't modernized in 50 years and and was left behind by Germany and Japan and the US.Not to mention Callaghan havind to go cap in hand to the IMF.Britain was CAPUT!! When she left office we had one of the most succesful economies in Europe and today we are we are in the top 10 wealthiest economies in the world.Blair and Brown followed Thatcherite policies throughout their administrations.They had nearly a decade and a half to reverse this and bring in real socialist policies such as re locating the wealth from the south east to the north,making trade union links stronger,re nationalization core industies,building more council houses etc etc and guess what? they chose not to!!!
As for the NHS,well if the Consevatives had wanted to 'get rid of it' as you say,they have had plenty of opportunity under Thatcher,Major and now Cameron and thus far I've seen scant evidence,but clearly you know better!!! (nice to see you've gone from wanting to 'get rid of' to 'wanting to regulate!!'
As for Labours 'good work' you must mean selling off most of our gold reserves at rock bottom prices and leaving this country with it's biggest overdraft EVER!! THE ELECTORATE AREN'T THAT BLIND even if you are!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
The economic achievement of Thatcher/Major was phenomenal, as set out by Superbot. The failure was in PR. We really do have a situation where a generation later Thatcher is perceived by many - even people who scarcely remember the Thatcher years - as a bogey. The Conservatives have had years with the reputation of being the nasty party.

There is a real difficulty for the Conservatives in getting across a message which is not warm and cuddly. Labour have the cut less, cut later idea, which translates into Labour would not make any cut which hurts today. Oh the luxury of opposition! Conservatives have the difficult decisions. For example if they do nothing about the NHS it will fall to bits with an ageing and less fit population and more expensive medical techniques. So they will have to reform - and it is so easy for Labour to create fear. Yes we will have a different NHS at the end.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The economic achievement of Thatcher/Major was phenomenal,
I am afraid I dont see it that way. Heath also sought to break union power, but failed. He failed because he did not have sufficient support form the general public. It took a few more years for the country to come round to the idea that wages had to be cut and industry modernised and streamlined rather than subsidised. Once this had happened, Thatcher was able to bring in policies to do this, though she was immensely cautious in doing this. The time was right for it and therefore it happened.

On the flip side there were big problems. There might not have been a second term had the Argentines not invaded the Falklands.

The Poll tax was an insane idea whose results probably persist today. A large number of people instantly disappeared from the electoral register because they refused to pay. In a democracy? The principle of paying to vote remains in force.

There was nothing wrong with the policy of selling council houses, but everything wrong with the policy of forbidding councils to build new ones to meet housing need. This was coupled with a policy of preventing the private sector from building houses. This was INSANE! It is a big contributor to our current problems.

This administration cemented the idea that university education would be paid for by students not the state. It dismantled the notion that higher education was done to benefit the country and so would be paid for by the country. Instead we have increasingly moved to the position that university is a personal luxury. More people go but skill shortages increase. The idea of elitist education being desireable was further stamped on by adding some more coffin screws to the grammar school system, which for hundreds of years had provided an educated elite the state needed. Now we believe in mediocrity.

Demolition of the minimg industry continued apace. From the one extreme of subsidising everything, the country lurched to subsidising nothing. This leads us directly to the situation now, where the countries last train manufacturer has been put out of operation for no good economic reason. If this persists much longer, never mind coal mines, we wont even have power stations within the UK.

The Conservatives have had years with the reputation of being the nasty party.
Understandable if under their administration your town disappeared because its industry closed, you cannot get a home because there are none anywhere near somewhere there might be jobs, failings in the NHS led to relatives of yours dying, your kids go to a crap school.

Yes, the economy was turned around. But it is increasingly clear the gap between rich and poor is enlarging, and this is increasingly not acceptable. The switch to dependence on the finance industry, a traditional conservative bastion, has proved disastrous.

Lets not discuss gay rights, to which conservatives have come kicking and screaming despite at least their fair share of closet cases. The one good thing to be said about HIV was it forced conservatives to take gay people seriously and concede the idea that people had sex.

There is a real difficulty for the Conservatives in getting across a message which is not warm and cuddly. Labour have the cut less, cut later idea, which translates into Labour would not make any cut which hurts today. Oh the luxury of opposition! Conservatives have the difficult decisions.
At the last budget the conservatives basically adopted the position already prepared by labour when in power. What was difficult about that? At this moment they are commencing quantitative easing again, which they derided when labour did the same.

For example if they do nothing about the NHS it will fall to bits with an ageing and less fit population and more expensive medical techniques.
Isnt it a paradox that things are getting worse because there exist better techniques for care while the old ones which we have managed with thus far have become cheaper?
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
But that isnt putting it simply. Putting it simply you have no choice of government because bothe parties with a chance of winning believe in exactly the same things. In politics your enemies are not the people in the other party but your rivals within your own.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Are you trying to hijack the thread by discussing discussing instead of discussing politics? You just acknowledged the issue is other than you said by accepting there is something to debate.
 

D_Johnson Withernads

Just Browsing
Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Posts
122
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
51
Your logic is sound however I'm too knackered to debate.

I'm not biting. It's siesta time...

Okay, I'll nibble just a little.

Whether you have a choice in government is hardly the issue either (on this thread - of course I like an option). Regardless of whether you place your vote for one or the other (excuse me discarding the rest) through self interest or a life-long allegience to their party values, you can be assured that the election manifesto promises will magically disappear when whoever wins is in power.

I'm not disputing that these days the major parties have all moved to a relatively common centre ground. Political rhetoric is fine (especially when you find yourself in opposition), but when the shit hits the fan something needs to be done. People here will be debating Tory cuts to Labour spending 'til the cows come home and I hope you all enjoy it. Maybe I'll join in later, but not now.

By the way, I don't consider myself to be a Tory, Labour, LibDem, Green, UKIP or any other party supporter. In elections in the UK and in Australia I vote for whoever I believe will be most beneficial for the country come election time. That hopefully coincides with my self interest.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
the paradigm is that only left wing parties make bold right wing actions and only right wing parties make left wing acts. The right can behave socialist bcause there is nowehere for offended voters to go and vice versa. So there is still hope that the conservatives will introduce measures to cut the banks down to size, wheres the left wouldnt dare.
 

D_Johnson Withernads

Just Browsing
Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Posts
122
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
51
That's an interesting way of looking at it.

I do hope something is done to curb the excessive risk in our financial institutions practices. But considering the financial sector has largely carried on where it left off while the rest of the UK suffers for the financial sectors misdeeds (okay, it's not that simple, I admit), then the current government may really not want to risk alienating any of its traditional supporters as its position in power is precarious to say the least.

I was going to mention something about people having a very short term memory, but that'll give away my true feelings on the subject! Oh shit, I did it...