Labour aren't exactly angels and they have made mistakes, but I think how bad they've been gets exaggerated a lot and even if he is anti-Labour, that suggests he would prefer the Tories and I just can't comprehend that. Unless he's amassed a large amount of wealth, then it makes sense.
The difference to me is that the Tories are the Tories and everyone should know what they're about. They clearly don't, but that's a separate issue. Labour went from being a party for the working class and a lot of the middle class to being the Red Tory Lite Party. They abandoned their traditional support, while still taking money from them, then tried to switch back a bit after Blair finally ****ed off. They rebranded themselves, then lost direction completely and stumbled around in the middle ground a bit. That's still far better than a party of horrible, nasty ****bags who hate most of the people in their own country, but it's still pretty crap.
Myth 1 could be argued that the Tories are reducing the amount we are borrowing year on year, since Labour bankrupted us: please log in to view this image In fact it's worth remembering that Labour took us from being in surplus to this situation, due to their culture of raising people with the attitude of "I want it all and now, without having to work hard for it". OK, the Tories have not cleared it yet, but it's going in the right direction. Myth 2:"our long-term economic plan is working" Key point here is long-term see myth 1 that we are moving in the right direction. Myth 3: "the quality of lives for working families has got better" Meh Also worth noting that is you've been following this thread, as you obviously have, then you would have seen what PNP duly noted. Some things I agree with others not. However, I am opposed to strikes, which do cause working families difficulties and financial costs at a time when some people are already finding things tough financially, for the selfish notion of getting guaranteed above inflation pay rises.
This might hold some water if the Tories opposed the Labour policies that allowed the banks to **** up the economy of the entire bloody world. Not only did they not do this, but they wanted even less regulation. Cameron himself called for this. Why are working families in that position, again?
Whilst true, that doesn't change the facts that Labour took us from a surplus to bankrupting us. Or the fact that the last coalition government year-on-year have reduced the borrowing. Because of the previous Labour governments as well as the small issue of a couple of dodgy bankers and a bit of a worldwide recession....
A surplus that was created under which government, again? It might not change the facts, but it should prevent the Tories from using it as a criticism. If George Graham criticised Jose Mourinho for playing pragmatic football, then he'd sound like a twat and everyone would point it out. The media simply run with their favoured party's rhetoric, instead.
Do you not think that maybe they could have saved some back for a rainy day? I know when I have a bit of spare cash, I don't just squander it on something stupid.
I've told you why Labour didn't bankrupt us and you are still peddling the myth. You've basically just ignored what I said. How have Labour taken us from being in a surplus to this situation? Labour's spending was no different to Thatcher's in the 80's. GDP growth was higher under Labour than it has been under the coalition. You are so wrong, it is actually unbelievable. No, we aren't. Increase in food banks hit record high, a dramatic increase in child poverty, average earnings gone down, increased privatisation of the NHS and the Royal Mail, no rent caps for landlords, tax breaks for millionaires, house prices still ridiculously high and we are still well below our targets for building houses/social housing, a potential further £12bn cuts to welfare and potentially scrapping the Human Rights Act. But of course, we are moving in the right direction.... Great counter argument here. What a brilliant piece of analysis. Don't care. You seem to be pretty serious in this response you gave so you are pretty much a Tory judging by what you've said. Point proven. You are a Tory. Perhaps you should be thanking Unions for giving you weekends and putting pressure on the government to not get away with whatever they want. Have a bit more class about you.
The crash in 2000 kinda ****ed that, though. They also overdid it when attempting to repair the various things that the Tories had ignored for years, preferring to flog everything to their mates.
Oh, get over yourself. Apart from the strikes quote (whilst I'll respond), nowhere have I said I believe, I have said It could be argued or similar. I could provide you stats and arguments from various websites that support Tory policies, same as I could UKIP or anyone. With regards to Unions, yes, in the dim past, unions did a reasonable job of protecting workers rights. But I am talking a long time back. Reducing working hours, protecting workers safety etc etc Now though and at the risk of offending a great number of people, I do not agree with public sector workers striking unless for very good reasons, like workplace safety. Why? Public sector workers have been getting pay rises each year for the last forever (albeit not as much as they would like and in real-terms not above inflation). Private sector workers haven't and in may cases have taken pay cuts. During this particular period if a public sector worker, like a teacher, strikes, that has an impact on private sector workers with kids. The impacts may include having to take unpaid annual leave, or paying for child care, therefore costing a huge number of people actual money through no fault of their own. Please take a reality check, no-one is getting paid more at the moment. Don't be inconsiderate and disrupt the rest of the Country economically.
You are an idiot and I mean that in the worst possible way. I have clearly shown that my graphs have been taken from independent think tanks or the Institute of Fiscal Studies. I didn't get any of my graphs or data from a Labour/Green website. From The Institute of Fiscal Studies: "If, as these projections suggest, public sector pay falls by 5.6 percentage points relative to the private sector between 2013–14 and 2018–19, then the relative pay gap will be lower than its level in the early 2000s. This was a time when parts of the public sector had difficulties recruiting and retaining high-quality staff.12 However, this was also a time when there was rising demand for public sector workers. Over the next few years, we instead expect the size of the public sector workforce to fall (with cuts of more than one million already planned between 2010–11 and 2018–19)" "Since 2011, squeezes on public sector pay have reduced the premium such that by the end 2014–15, the estimated differential is likely to be close to its pre-crisis level." There has been massive cuts to public sector worker salaries, so you're wrong that they get rises every year. If the cost of living goes up, then they are entitled to ask for more. Evidence? Don't waste your time using anecdotes. Spoken like a true Tory. Thatcher would be proud.
Calm down, BG. The facts speak for themselves. You don't need to criticise Magic Man personally. He's right about being able to pull up stats from other sources that would paint things in a positive light for the Tories or UKIP. That's part of the problem. There's a system supporting the rhetoric. Most scientists in the relevant fields believe that man's influence on climate change is extremely important and damaging. That's not stopping certain interested parties in pushing an alternative view. I can understand that, despite finding it abhorrent. The issue is that their money can buy such a large amount of airtime and influence. The same is true in politics.
Wow. Being called an 'idiot' on an internet forum "in the worst possible way", by what I assume is a student, is really upsetting. Can a mod please look at this very harsh bullying please? You obviously missed my constant clues that I was on a wind-up. Just to clarify for everyone else who did get the obvious, these are not entirely my views. Also, I am not against unions, just strikes that affect the rest of the public financially and given the last teaching strike ONLY, popular opinion shows I was not the only person. Oh and Thatcher was the best PM this country ever had. Amazing lady, made my life better.
If it benefitted me and mine first, then **** yes. You know it. Any action being taken on my complaint? I hear Internet bullying is being clamped down on, on these forum things, you old Welsh socialist ****?
Nope, I chose to ignore them because, when you gave a serious response, your views aren't really that different in comparison to when you're ''on the wind-up''. Keep telling yourself that, though. Is this another example of you on the wind-up? A pretty piss poor attempt I have to say.
He's obviously on a wind up, and because he doesn't realise he's not funny, not clever or bringing anything worthwhile to an interesting discussion, then IMO that makes him an idiot. I've yet to see him say anything worthwhile tbh.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-attempts-secure-knighthood-Jimmy-Savile.html I thought you were dead?
If you're doing well then Great catch. Just shows, despite clear warning from the committee, she stubbornly moved forward with her recommendation. Damn, you'd think Thatcher would backtrack after meeting him, he looks well dodgy in that pic. Sorry, he looks well dodge in every pic!
