Quote:
|
You are still looking at the net change in overall population and refusing to consider the rise/fall of local populations.
|
Clarify this, give examples.
Quote:
|
If anything is clear, it's that you're linking to pages that you haven't read! Or at least not read without your reading being informed by your own Party affiliation.
|
Disagree there that's not a fair comment, my charge is you didn't read a page from a channel 4 web site. My reading is independent, I reach conclusions for myself.
Quote:
|
I did read the page you linked to, and it said exactly what I summarised it as saying: that the Lib Dem plans add up, unless certain circumstances they have assumed turn out not to occur, in which case there will be trouble. I added to that a point that I note you have completely ignored, and that is when Brown continually makes growth forecasts that economists in general consider to be too optimistic, you don't get up and accuse him of being 'vague' in the same way as you accuse the Lib Dems of being vague. Yet, he is doing exactly what they are doing - making plans based on an assumed set of future circumstances.
|
May I spell this one out:
"Independent financial experts at The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) has another concern.
It says there is nothing to stop high tax payers changing their earning behaviour in light of higher taxes. And, it asserts, most changes in behaviour will have an adverse affect on the party's ability to raise the predicted sums.
High earners could reduce their taxable incomes knowing the financial penalty from doing so is diminished. For example, they could decide to work fewer hours, retire earlier or, most drastically of all, leave the country and work elsewhere.
High-income foreigners, meanwhile, might choose not to come to the UK in the same numbers as today. "
Above from Factfile page previously quoted. So IFS do have concerns about the Lib dem proposals and not what you think at all. Still it doesn't matter as the Lib dems will not be in office.
Quote:
|
You make it out as if Labour has had one unfortunate spell of unelectbility in its entire existence, when the fact is that until this year no Labour Government had ever survived two full terms in office.
|
Nowhere have I suggested this. The governments under Harold Wilson though, the first Premier with a degree in economics nearly made it possible. Wilson's government was hit by crisis on the pound about which he unfortunately made the wrong decisions.
The New Labour project which led to a thorough internal reform of the Labour Party has enabled new skills of presentation and has indeed made it possible for labour to look forward to a Third term ofgovernment.
Quote:
|
Inability to manage the country has been fundamental to the character of the Labour party for a lot longer than the period from 1979 to 1997. It's only since 1997, when (and I make the point again) Labour finally agreed that Thatcher's reforms were there to stay, that Labour has found itself to be re-electable. Funny, that.
|
That's not a fair comment. The New Labour government was prepared to allow matters to remain as they are. It would have been a bizarre act to suddenly re-nationalise companies sold off cheaply, though clearly public opinion did seem to swing in favour of re-nationalising the railway industry due to the incompetence of the companies resposible and the massive public investment they enjoy.
Quote:
|
Yes, redistribution, something not far from the lips of a great many backbenchers. You and I both know that the New Labour project is a scam held in place only by the sheer force of personality of a few people at the top of the heirarchy.
|
No, New Labour is not a scam, it certainly is successful don't assume my agreement there is no agreement with you.
Quote:
|
I am looking forward to seeing what happens when Blair is shown to be damaged goods on May 5, and when Brown - who IIRC actually used the word 'redistribution' in defence of his last budget - gets into Number 10. I predict a lot more noise from a lot of lefties who have been kept quiet for rather a long time now.
|
Well you may have to wait forever. Blair has a remarkable ability to bounce back again, he is according to a poll I saw not long ago leading the popularity stakes well ahead of Howard & Kennedy. Depends what you mean by "lefties" I beleive few people would associate themselves with extremism from the left it's not a viable alternative.
Well it goes to show that the Labour Party is not monolithic, people have opinions and views as I do which may or may not differ from those in leadership positions,