You are here: Home | Forum | Election 2019 - Week 3
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.
---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------
Of course it did, because of the deficit. That's why we needed to reduce the deficit. Pay attention, man!
---------- Post added at 17:04 ---------- Previous post was at 17:02 ----------
I think the point Chris was making was that the examples you gave were fluff and nobody really cares about all that. The decision we have to make is about which party will keep us solvent, and on that basis, the Conservatives will romp home.
---------- Post added at 17:07 ---------- Previous post was at 17:04 ----------
The debt results from Labour's deficit. Do you not get that?
The austerity was needed in order to reduce the deficit, thereby prevent the debt from escalating to levels that would be calamatous for this country. Without austerity, the debt would be far more than it is now.
Old Boy, our fag packet economic expert, continuing to peddle his neo-liberal capitalist fantasy.
Austerity wasn’t needed to reduce the deficit (and indeed despite austerity the deficit remains). Recognition was needed that the one off windfalls of privatisation were gone. No more family silver was left to sell. Taxes had to go up to continue paying for public services. It remains as true today as it was in 2010.
Previously, before we decided to allow private companies to extract as much of the state’s wealth as possible and move it offshore, the alternative would have been to invest in our economy. Long needed infrastructure projects would have been paid for and long term benefits for the economy as a whole would have resulted.
To say there was no alternative is absolutely groundless in economics. The government budget isn’t a household budget, however capitalist fantasists have realised this is the easiest sell to a gullible public. You don’t want the state to do that, but if they give us money we will do a Carillion and walk away with billions in the process.
Old Boy, our fag packet economic expert, continuing to peddle his neo-liberal capitalist fantasy.
Austerity wasn’t needed to reduce the deficit (and indeed despite austerity the deficit remains). Recognition was needed that the one off windfalls of privatisation were gone. No more family silver was left to sell. Taxes had to go up to continue paying for public services. It remains as true today as it was in 2010.
Previously, before we decided to allow private companies to extract as much of the state’s wealth as possible and move it offshore, the alternative would have been to invest in our economy. Long needed infrastructure projects would have been paid for and long term benefits for the economy as a whole would have resulted.
To say there was no alternative is absolutely groundless in economics. The government budget isn’t a household budget, however capitalist fantasists have realised this is the easiest sell to a gullible public. You don’t want the state to do that, but if they give us money we will do a Carillion and walk away with billions in the process.
Are you sure you don't mean the family gold sold off at a cut price rate?
Are you sure you don't mean the family gold sold off at a cut price rate?
Under the Conservatives or “New” Labour it’s one and the same. I don’t care for the distinction - neither wanted to face up to telling the problem we need to raise more in tax. This raises the question of where that burden should fall.
The few billion lost in the sale of gold is nothing next to the accumulated billions extracted by energy/water/telecoms oligopolies over the years.
Yet you let it go over your head that Labour has a £80 Billion+ spending spree that is not fully costed, requires a forest of magic money trees.
You're happy to let it go over your head that Labour is a Marxist movement that would drive the UK to a Venezuela way of living, where not even the rich would be able to afford a cup of coffee.
You're prepared to let it go over your head that Corbyn wants rid of Trident, making Russia very happy.
You say us who wish to vote Tory on here, are deluded, I think you got serious problems if you think Labour is your answer, deluded and brainwashed you say, if the shoe fits, wear it yourself!
I've never voted for either of the main parties Mick. I know you like pigeon holing people in to winners/loser, them/us, but it isn't always that simple. However if if a choice between Johnson and anybody else, i'd vote anybody else.
Corbyn is a genuine socialist (not a Marxist/communist or any of that tabloid crap) - its just shocked people, we haven't had one or a genuine choice for decades.
I just don't see why one party is rightly held to account on costings, and the other is exempt, take your blinkers off. Whether its Brexit or the election we're all on the same side at the end of the day - it won't matter which way you voted if you're waiting for life saving medical treatment - we'd be in the same boat.
I am quite certain that you, and Denphone, would be personally aggrieved if somebody kept repeating errors of judgment you made more than a decade ago, without discussion of context, with the clear intention that other people should judge your character based solely on their list of your past failings regardless of any restorative action you may have taken.
It isn't really my main issue with Boris Johnson. I am just providing the source although I do think people are entitled to hold it against him because, despite his apology, he does have a habit of using inflammatory language to prove a point.
I could give a long list of reasons I don't really trust him but it's sort of pointless since I won't support him because of Brexit. Maybe if he as a Remainer I would be more forgiving, it's hard to tell to degree to which personal bias is in play.
Public School Idiots running the country... God help us all. What a crap mandate the Cons have. 20,000 more police (which they got rid of in the first place), 40 new hospitals to be built (we have no staff to man the ones we have got).. and what else was it O yes 50,000 more nurses!?!?!?!?
We have just had ten years of crap... more to come me thinks.
Public School Idiots running the country... God help us all. What a crap mandate the Cons have. 20,000 more police (which they got rid of in the first place), 40 new hospitals to be built (we have no staff to man the ones we have got).. and what else was it O yes 50,000 more nurses!?!?!?!?
We have just had ten years of crap... more to come me thinks.
Some of us want to see the country prosper rather than sink into debt. Your characterisation of Conservative politicians is just naive and frankly, completely wrong. You need to start seeing the world as it really is. Corbyn’s promises may sound good to you, but it’s worth nothing more than a six year old’s Christmas list. It simply cannot be delivered because it costs too much and the money would run out long before they reached half way through it.
Public School Idiots running the country... God help us all. What a crap mandate the Cons have. 20,000 more police (which they got rid of in the first place), 40 new hospitals to be built (we have no staff to man the ones we have got).. and what else was it O yes 50,000 more nurses!?!?!?!?
We have just had ten years of crap... more to come me thinks.
I think you’re doing the lads a disservice here Richard. I mean they aren’t actually running the country that’s the offshore corporate interests that are funding them, Russian oligarchs or possibly even the FSB. I mean Boris did meet with them without his security detail when he was foreign secretary.
---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Some of us want to see the country prosper rather than sink into debt. Your characterisation of Conservative politicians is just naive and frankly, completely wrong. You need to start seeing the world as it really is. Corbyn’s promises may sound good to you, but it’s worth nothing more than a six year old’s Christmas list. It simply cannot be delivered because it costs too much and the money would run out long before they reached half way through it.
More absolute nonsense. The country is already 2 trillion in debt, a figure that has doubled under the Tories in nominal terms. Despite selling off almost everything worth selling in the last forty years we are still 2 trillion in debt because of failed neo-liberal economic policies. The Tory bribe of selling people their council houses and deregulating lending to push up prices is a one off windfall.
Future generations have no such windfall. Only the debt from previous generations extravagance and poor decision making.
Pray, tell, Old Boy, how and when should we pay the 2 trillion back? How do we fund it so we can stop squandering billions on interest payments?
Public School Idiots running the country... God help us all. What a crap mandate the Cons have. 20,000 more police (which they got rid of in the first place), 40 new hospitals to be built (we have no staff to man the ones we have got).. and what else was it O yes 50,000 more nurses!?!?!?!?
We have just had ten years of crap... more to come me thinks.
ICM’s fourth published voting intention poll of the general election campaign shows a narrower Conservative lead than last week. In this week’s poll, the Conservative lead over Labour stands at seven points, compared to a 10-point lead last week.
The Conservatives drop one point to 41%, while Labour climb by two points compared to last week, taking them to 34%.
Elsewhere, the Liberal Democrats remain on 13%, while the Brexit Party fall a point to 4%. In constituencies in which the Brexit Party is standing, the party is polling at 9%.
__________________ There is always light.
If only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it. If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
Give up Mr K, you're not winning this argument or any one you've laid here yet, judging by each poll result thus far, and yes I'm still voting for the Conservatives to stop a Marxist and Commie prick for leader like Corbyn getting in.
I think you’re doing the lads a disservice here Richard. I mean they aren’t actually running the country that’s the offshore corporate interests that are funding them, Russian oligarchs or possibly even the FSB. I mean Boris did meet with them without his security detail when he was foreign secretary.
---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------
More absolute nonsense. The country is already 2 trillion in debt, a figure that has doubled under the Tories in nominal terms. Despite selling off almost everything worth selling in the last forty years we are still 2 trillion in debt because of failed neo-liberal economic policies. The Tory bribe of selling people their council houses and deregulating lending to push up prices is a one off windfall.
Future generations have no such windfall. Only the debt from previous generations extravagance and poor decision making.
Pray, tell, Old Boy, how and when should we pay the 2 trillion back? How do we fund it so we can stop squandering billions on interest payments?
As usual
You complain about austerity, but also complain about adding to the public debt. Are you suggesting that in 2010 the spending taps should have been turned off by such a huge amount? That really would have been austerity. If the deficit levels inherited in 2010, had been continued, that would have added yet another £600bn to the debt.
The crash happened around 10 years into a Labour government.
As usual
You complain about austerity, but also complain about adding to the public debt. Are you suggesting that in 2010 the spending taps should have been turned off by such a huge amount? That really would have been austerity. If the deficit levels inherited in 2010, had been continued, that would have added yet another £600bn to the debt.
The crash happened around 10 years into a Labour government.
And ten years later the Tories are still running a deficit, doubling total debt in nominal terms. The Tories ran deficits in the vast majority of the Thatcher and Major years.
Totally flawed economics.
40 years of failure. I note you haven’t addressed any of my points simply misinterpreted them for the purpose of deflection. So I will repeat my point:
Future generations have no such windfall. Only the debt from previous generations extravagance and poor decision making.
If it’s about balancing the books then when should we pay the 2 trillion back? How do we fund it so we can stop squandering billions on interest payments?
And ten years later the Tories are still running a deficit, doubling total debt in nominal terms. The Tories ran deficits in the vast majority of the Thatcher and Major years.
Totally flawed economics.
40 years of failure. I note you haven’t addressed any of my points simply misinterpreted them for the purpose of deflection. So I will repeat my point:
Future generations have no such windfall. Only the debt from previous generations extravagance and poor decision making.
If it’s about balancing the books then when should we pay the 2 trillion back? How do we fund it so we can stop squandering billions on interest payments?
We cannot pay it back because we have people like you, moaning about Austerity all the time.
We cannot pay it back because we have people like you, moaning about Austerity all the time.
Austerity hasn’t reduced it though, has it?
There is absolutely no plan. The state has no assets, no growth and people don’t want to pay tax. It simply doesn’t work. The older generations just hope this pozni scheme holds up til they die.
40 years of failure. Barely ran a surplus in that time with debt through the roof.
Join CF
You are here: 
