We really need huge inefficient public sector, massive borrowings, higher taxation, pension decimation, no gold, higher disability claimers, greater loss of power to Europe etc etc.

You are in complete denial about the root cause of the deficit - the bankers only added to what was a mountain of debt already accumulated by Brown/Balls etc.

but we all get free health care who ever is in charge. nothing has changed since tories got in. i still have my regular hospital check ups and scans(and will continue to do so for at least the next 2 years) and blood tests and drugs etc. i havent had to wait any longer, or my treatment has been inferior under the tories.so that disproves a lot of pro labour/anti tory propaganda re the NHS.

as regards the war, no im not in favour but theres nowt i can do about that or TBH can any of us.if labour had have been in power we would still have been involved in that war or any future conflicts coming our way.
labour would have done very little different to what the tories are doing now(they would have had to cut down on their ridiculous spending sprees with money we just dont have) if they had won the last election.
its just convenient to slag off the govt as it suits a certain agenda from the majority who post in the sin bin. there certainly would have been less criticism of labour doing what the cons are doing.

Oh dear, oh dear.

So - and I'll write this slowly to help you - do you really believe that:

1) the financial crisis that affected other parts of the world was completely unconnected to that in the UK and it's just a coincidence that they happened at the same time;

2) the global financial crisis was caused by events in the UK?

Or is your comprehension of this a tad like your belief that I said you shouldn't buy bananas, and your assertion that careers have whopping big expense accounts etc?

The plain fact is that the deficit was around the same as in John Major's time before the financial crash.

I think you're in "complete denial" about just what a plonker you've been making of yourself. At least you old occasionally acknowledge when you've been shown to be totally wrong.

Do you think that the Conservatives would have created the NHS in the first place? Indeed, they're currently in the process of trying to privatise it – Cameron having lied about 'no more top-down reorganisations of the NHS'.

One could also note what was done to dental and ophthalmic care – and to prescription costs. And the specific effect of privatisation on, say, rates of MRSA and c-diff.



Do you remember all those stories about old people dying on a trolley in a hospital corridor? They weren't just in left-wing papers, but were widespread before 1997.

Have such stories been rife since then? There are plenty of parts of the media that would have enjoyed printing them. Why do you think that might be?

Waiting times are on the increase. Bed blocking is increasing again too.



I've personally never been shy of condemning Labour – not least for continuing the same basic economic policies that were put in place by the government of Margaret Thatcher and for Blair's wars. I don't remember even Blair having the gall to govern by u-turn and lies quite so obviously and so quickly – at least not until the notorious 45 minutes claim that enabled him to go to war with his best [uconservative/right wing[/u and religious buddy, backed by his other great [uconservative/right wing[/u and [iBible[/i-publishing mate.

But back to that economic continuation – I know it displeases Conservatives to think that what happened under Labour was essentially a continuation of the same economic ideology as the Conservative governments of Margaret Thatcher had put in place, but that is a fact.

Continued privatisation and deregulation are [unot[/u hallmarks of any left-wing economic philosophy.

And that continues – this government has already tried to sell off the blood service and, fortunately, been knocked back by substantial campaigning work. Just imagine – you'd could have donated your blood for free and someone else could have made a profit out of it.

Are you for real? maybe all the time worry about cleaners and the MRSA epidemic or companies taking pension holidays - has clouded your tiny and I mean tiny!!

To answer you points
1. Are you seriously suggesting that the deficit was under control before the bankers blew it wide open?
2. Unlike under Major - Labour were experiencing unprecedented tax revenues and still the deficit was increasing at an alarming rate.
3. Now one of your favourites - please show me where I have posted that careers have big expenses accounts, I have a had a reasonable career and I have never had a big expense account?
4. Do you deny that claims for incapacity benefit increased under the last Labour government to levels previous thought impossible - during a time of record spending on the NHS and a significant decrease in manual labour in the work place and increased H&S legalisation?
5. Was it a figment of my imagination but did Brown not sell off a big portion of the gold reserves at a point when gold was at its cheapest?
6. On the bananas - I demonstrated the volumes of small independent retailers still selling these basic ingredients, the fact that most choose to use the supermarket is not because of availability - it must be all the mind bending that you claim supermarkets subject us all too - and you claim I am "Plonker" kettle and pot!!

I suggest you need to take a chill pill - you won't need a big one for that tiny mind of yours.

My "tiny" what?



You haven't answered the questions I asked.

To repeat: do you believe that either the global financial crisis was completely unconnected to that in the UK and a coincidence – or that Brown etc al caused that too?

Come on – it's not a difficult question to answer.



No. It. Was. Not.



Indeed, I doubt "careers" claim any expenses at all. Neither do carers – but that didn't stop that little fantasy of yours, did it? And I don't recall you acknowledging that you were incorrect on that score, in spite of being shown to be absolutely wrong.

But that's part of the point – you never do acknowledge being shown to be wrong.



The word is 'legislation'. And you claim to be a great intellect!

But since you're so much better than those of who don't live in "the real world" (©
sal paradise), perhaps you can stop the knee-jerk fantasy games and provide evidence for these assertions and claims.

IIRC – and I'll have to look for the charts and stats – the numbers claiming disability benefit fell during Labour's time in office (or certainly didn't rise). That's in the "real world", chucky boy – not in your rabid, tabloid fantasy world.

Health and safety is not just about workplaces. And accidents happen – see the relevant thread – that could have been avoided if health and safety regulations had been avoided.

Good grief – even a government minister admitted, a few weeks ago, that there is no problem with H&S legislation itself, but with the fear of litigation sending people to hide behind H&S. And then the knee-jerk brigade like you, who simply prefer to accept that it's somehow at the root of 'Broken Britain', without actually being able to explain what on Earth you even mean by that.



I haven't said he didn't – you're now into the realms of inventing red herrings in terms of this debate. However, I look forward to your condemnation of Thatcher and co for using the revenues from North Sea gas to deindustrialise.



You leapt in to a discussion accusing me of claiming that people should not buy bananas, when I had written absolutely nothing of the sort. And this from someone who flings around accusations against other posters that they can't read properly.



Thanks for another contribution that adds something intelligent to the debate. No, really.

Cameron now has a six point lead.

Take it!!

...in ???

And Labour retained a seat in a by-election with an 8% swing from Conservative to Labour after DC used the veto. A seat which had been won by the Tories in the late 80's general elections as well so not one that had been Labour for ever either.

You fail to point out that only 30% of potential voters voted and that a large porportion of that quantity were postal votes which had to be in before DC's Euro actions last week.

So claiming an overall swing of 8.5% from Tories to Labour is not a true reflection of the nation as a whole.

Not my words, but Radio 5 Live's Chief Political Commentator John Pienaar's.

You also fail to point out that despite the scaremongers on here, the majority of the UK public agree with Cameron.

I know it really really hurts you extreme left, Euro lovers on here. I know it hurts bad, but I'm sorry you are wrong.

It's time you moved on.

There are still Euros lovers on here? The Eurozone will break up shortly. The government is, according to the loony press (although they are usually correct on ths sort of thing), planning how to repatriate ca. 1 million brits (mainly retirees) from Spain and Portugal as they reckon Spanish banks will go bust.

Quote ="Dally"There are still Euros lovers on here? The Eurozone will break up shortly. The government is, according to the loony press (although they are usually correct on ths sort of thing), planning how to repatriate ca. 1 million brits (mainly retirees) from Spain and Portugal as they reckon Spanish banks will go bust.'" Sarko seems to be going the other way with this little gem : www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... -london.do

Quote ="Dally"There are still Euros lovers on here? The Eurozone will break up shortly. The government is, according to the loony press (although they are usually correct on ths sort of thing), planning how to repatriate ca. 1 million brits (mainly retirees) from Spain and Portugal as they reckon Spanish banks will go bust.'" Sarko seems to be going the other way with this little gem : www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... -london.do

I just find it hilarious reading the thoughts of all you little englanders. Somebody in the pub actually buys the Daily Star and reading the text messages they receive and print is similar to reading the guff from all you right-wing eeejits on here

You do realise that that is how statistics work don't you ?

You realise that the political press officers, the ones who decide which stories are to appear in the opinion sheets tomorrow, they are the ones who pick the statistics that suit their agendas and ignore the ones that don't ?

So losing a seat mid way through a term can easily be written off if only 30% of the electorate voted, and some of those were postal votes so theres another good excuse (what level does the percentage have to be before you can say with authority "Most of those were postal votes" ?), whilst all at the same time claiming a 6 point lead from another un-named source (you still haven't named it).

All of this bluster is of course to divert attention away from the grumblings of discontent at the no deal declared by Cameron and the fact that they lost a by election - you do understand how all this works don't you ?

Or do you just let Rupert Murdochs press formulate your opinions for you ?

We are winning.

You are losing.

I've voted in every election since 1979. As it's a secret ballot my choices remain so. No offence but you may be confusing a lack of political opinion with an opinion that I know all the answers, which I certainly do not. Unlike some other posters?

Indeed - and I agree the single market is vital. It's a shame we Europeans couldn't just stop there though.

Oh right, so Euro sceptics and people on the right of the political divide are all xenophobic, illiterate morons? Why didn't you say so earlier, all the time we've wasted NOT worshipping at your feet.

Silly us eh?

So you hold opinions without believing they're right? How odd.

But I've yet to see anyone on here who claims to "know all the answers" - perhaps you can point out who does and on what you base such a claim? That would mean showing evidence that they think that they "know ALL the answers", as you suggest.

So little, there is no capital E!

Anyway, why is someone opposed to Britain joining the Euro a 'little Englander?' Surely, they are rationale people? Why is it somehow superior to succumb to the undemocratic act of faith that is the Euro project?

Has anyone ever claimed that it wasn't? I'm confused as to why this totally irrelevant fact keeps getting brought up.

([url=http://lostalumni.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/looking-to-the-future/source[/url)

The issue isn't about what happened prior to 2000 (we entered a boom period and so were able to move to a surplus - there's a clear trend on the graph). Nor is it about what happened from 2008 onwards (global financial crisis). It's what went wrong in 2001/2002 that required the government to run a significant deficit for the following six years.

There are reasons why it didn't stop there, and some of them are at least understandable even if not what you might call good ones. In fact there are some pretty strong reasons why a Europe integrated to [isome[/i degree above and beyond a simple free trade area is a good thing. Trouble is that the whole project has been botched, despite some good intentions by some parties. And I'm not sure what, if anything, can be rescued from the current sorry state of affairs.

Nothing went wrong as you put it. What you fail to mention is that while the deficits were similar to the end of the last Tory government as a % of GDP they were much lower. They were therefore sustainable in the short term and were what they were because people wanted money spent on things like the school infrastructure and so on. And that money needed spending with schools falling down and people left lying on trolleys is hospital corridors. We did actually benefit from the spending you know. However even Darling knew that could not go on forever and was planning to reduce it before we ever had a banking crisis. You are perpetuatomg a complete myth that running a deficit from 2001 to 2007 was in some way economic incompetence. if you look back over the economic history of the UK and similar countries it is just for the course. Without a banking crisis had the Tories won they would have carried on the same level of spending. That was their stated plan so they clearly didn't see the level of defict as evil. They do now because it's politically expedient to do so to beat Labour up about it and unfortunately most people are too thick to understand the difference between having a credit card debt and running an economy.

The game changer was the banking crisis. The level of deficit prior to that was not.

This is true. The conservatives agreed with just about every Labour spending policy prior to the point where they were forced to show their hand (which I should say was far, far too late and the media simply let them get away with it).

Capitalism has always needed protecting from itself. Left unchecked in a resource-finite environment it must ultimately devour itself which is why the economic legislative system was constructed. Unfortunately, the problem we have today is that people still think they are living in a world where the key economic actors are states. It's comfortable to think "Britain" really can shape its own destiny but the reality is that in a world where half the GDP of the US is cycled through the financial markets daily, a corporation or coalitions of corporations can effectively bankrupt a country (via capital flight or such) which chooses to implement unfavourable policies, where unelected and unaccountable trans-national bodies such as the WTO, IMF and World Bank wield tremendous power (far greater than anything Cameron, Blair & Thatcher put together could ever muster) the latitude for economic decision-making is narrower than a pencil mark.

Of course, this is nothing new. Seventy years ago countries (such as Germany) were complaining bitterly about the likes of the Rotschchilds sabotaging economic reforms. But back then a prime minister or a president or a chancellor did have the ability to fundamentally re-shape his country's economic system. Today this just isn't possible - unless you are willing to brave the colossal penalties. I mean, if you want a good example look at what happened to Yugoslavia when it chose to take on the IMF & World Bank.

Cameron has plenty of faults. But he is simply a pawn in a much greater game.

Who on here has advocated us joining the Euro anytime soon?