Is there anyone left on here that defends this Government?

[MrSmith 10]

The figs you supplied are on their own meaningless as they are not expressed as proportion of GDP (gross domestic product). Labour inherited a debt situation of 44% of GDP from John Major in1997, until the banks bailout the debt situation was actually below the inherited 44% fig, giving the lie to the points you are trying to make.

 

GDP rose over that period so the government had more money to spend but they increased their borrowing, when your income is low you borrow, as your income increases you pay it back and if it decreases again you borrow more.

As GDP increases the deficit should decrease, as GDP decreases the deficit should increase.

[Tony 10]

Try not to be silly, it's you who has made outrageous claims based on your mantra of private good public bad.

That may be your idealogical assumption but I don't think that I've ever said that. I simply believe that the public sector should be a high quality procurer of competitive and well managed and monitored private services.

 

In all my years at the coalface it's been private sector managers who have implemented poor decisions and then been promoted or moved away before the fall out has occurred.

Now you're being silly Max.

 

Systems are what make things bad, not individuals. People make good or bad decisions as individuals not institutions or sectors.

[WeX 10]

There was a good discussion on the radio this morning about the current problems and how differently the UK and the US had dealt with them.

 

Overall both countries have had similar results from very different approaches with one exception. The US went for stimulus and have suffered from it, while we and many other EU nations have opted for Austerity. The only difference between the UK and the US is we maintained our AAA credit rating while the US lost theirs.

 

There is little to sing and dance about as both trains of thought have failed to reverse rising unemployment and economic stagnation, but we have one bonus, it will be easier and faster for us to pay off our debts. The American speaking even joked that he was in the UK to ask to borrow money from us.

 

So to be honest, be it austerity or stimulus, neither has been a solution to our problems but one thing is certain, debt is the weight around our neck that needs sorting one way or another.

Edited October 20, 2011 by WeX

[alchresearch 214]

Try not to be silly, it's you who has made outrageous claims based on your mantra of private good public bad.

 

In all my years at the coalface it's been private sector managers who have implemented poor decisions and then been promoted or moved away before the fall out has occurred.

 

I'm with Max on this one. I'm a public sector manager and work hard to make sure my decisions are the right ones. I'm monitored by higher levels and have to make sure taxpayers money is spent wisely and efficiently.

 

Audits from various higher levels up the chain and FOI acts mean I can be scrutinised far easier than a colleague doing the same job in the private sector, and its far more likely any expensive mistake would make it into the papers than if a private sector manager made a bad decision.

[Fine line 10]

The figs you supplied are on their own meaningless as they are not expressed as proportion of GDP (gross domestic product). Labour inherited a debt situation of 44% of GDP from John Major in1997, until the banks bailout the debt situation was actually below the inherited 44% fig, giving the lie to the points you are trying to make.

 

Spot on as usual. Showing the Tory nutters are still living in their own fantasy world that even David Cameron wouldn't recognise.

 

In 1997 Labour inherited the best economy of any incoming government for 50 odd years. They spent the next 13 years destroying it.

[Mecky 10]

In 1997 Labour inherited the best economy of any incoming government for 50 odd years. They spent the next 13 years destroying it.

 

So why did the Tories get kicked out in 97?

[Mecky 10]

I'm wondering who the next group of people who are targetted and bullied by the government are going to be

[WeX 10]

So why did the Tories get kicked out in 97?

 

• Forced withdrawal from ERM in 1992 (which, paradoxically, helped recovery)

• Unpopular policies, for example, rail privatisation, VAT

• Air of arrogance and hubris, for example, sleaze, cheating on pairing on fishing quotas (1996), arms to Iraq, IRA prison escapes, BSE, judicial reviews, reluctance of ministers to accept responsibilities and resign

• Minority government by end of 1996. Government dependent in Commons on Unionists; abandonment of IRA ceasefire early in 1996.

• February 1997 Wirral South by-election: 1 7 per cent swing to Labour. (Unhappy irony: the Conservative candidate’s name, Leslie Byrom, is anagram of ‘loser by mile’)

• Manifest and bitter party disunity over Europe, especially smack-of-firm-compromise ‘wait and see’ approach to a single European currency

• Longest post-war electoral campaign - backfired. Boredom and further sleaze

• Sniping from the wings by James Goldsmith’s Referendum Party and Alan Sked’s Independence Party

• Defections by pro-Europeans such as Alan Howarth and Emma Nicholson

• Unpopularity of Major when compared to Blair

• Conservative Norman Lamont said government gave the impression of being ‘in office but not in power

• inept campaigning, for example, ‘demon eyes’ and ‘weeping lion’ posters ridiculed

• Conservative press largely turned against them especially "The Sun".

• Time for a change - widely held public sentiment

 

I cant take credit for the above, it was found here

 

Its interesting to see that some of the above could easily be used as reason why Labour lost the 2010 election. Especially sentences such as: "Air of arrogance and hubris ... reluctance of ministers to accept responsibilities and resign".

Edited October 20, 2011 by WeX

[Mecky 10]

Its interesting to see that some of the above could easily be used as reason why Labour lost the 2010 election. Especially sentences such as: "Air of arrogance and hubris ... reluctance of ministers to accept responsibilities and resign".

 

A bit like the situation now, then

[ampersand 10]

Its interesting to see that some of the above could easily be used as reason why Labour lost the 2010 election. Especially sentences such as: "Air of arrogance and hubris ... reluctance of ministers to accept responsibilities and resign".

 

The names and the specific issues may change but it is generally the case that, the longer a party has been in government, the more likley it is to lose the next election - there are always external factors that affect this, the principal one being the strength (or otherwise) of the opposition (and it is often true that it isn't the party in opposition which won the election, but the party in Government which lost it) but sometimes it is just "time for a change"

[WeX 10]

A bit like the situation now, then

 

Yes its a bit like the situation now, but pales in comparison to Labour in the 2000's and the Tories of the 1990's.

[WeX 10]

The names and the specific issues may change but it is generally the case that, the longer a party has been in government, the more likley it is to lose the next election - there are always external factors that affect this, the principal one being the strength (or otherwise) of the opposition (and it is often true that it isn't the party in opposition which won the election, but the party in Government which lost it) but sometimes it is just "time for a change"

 

very true, but the in my view the largest clincher was Gordon Brown stubbornly clinging to power in the Labour party, which has resulted in the current crop of Labour front bencher's who are pretty poor in all measure.