Coalition crack on to cutting benefits to Baby Factories

Alan_Cross

sunshinetours wrote: »

Alan_Cross wrote: »

Kohoutek wrote: »

Not joining the Euro was indeed a good idea - thats about it really

As people have said before the idea of idealistic socialism is actually pretty good. The reality is it can very rarely be realistically funded, and the same final result usually occurs (obviously this is helped when the world's economy also collapses masking the truth!)

Lowering corporation tax rates for small businesses so that many small businesses incorporated and benefited from paying very little if any tax, was a monumental schoolboy c**k up. Later rectified by more and more draconian legislation accussing all and sundry of tax evasion.
The last government was nothing but a joke in the business world I am afraid and that is what will be written in history - and to coin your phrase - FACT

I am no die hard Tory by (voted Nu Labour after falling for the propoganda first time round) but I certainly do see through GB and his misguided "reign". Unfortunately most politicians are self serving greedy egotistical individuals so I am under no illusions that the current crop are in reality any different

You can try and belittle people or shout people down with "FACTS" as much as you like but the truth will ultimately come out and history certainly will record Labours reign, but not as you describe it

There is no point in 'belittling' people who deny the historical record. They do that quite well enough for themselves.

I repeat, history will record:

1. GB managed a successful economy for 10 years, better than anything ever managed before.

2. He was torpedoed by world events beyond his control

3. He played a major part in leading the intergovernmental, international fightback.

To which I will add:

4. He lost the 2010 election through a combination of 2. and the effects of a biased, Tory press.

Join the flat earthers and be in denial if you want. This merely confirms you have your own agenda which cannot tolerate the mention of such matters.

greenbubble

Alan_Cross wrote: »

All the closet Tories on here spend half of their posts denying the fact.

GB wanted to ensure the continuing reversal of appalling Tory underspending on the health and education services which 95% of the population uses. 17 years of Thatcherite policies had to be seen off.

I remember the state of my local school's roof and the unbelievable trolley queuing in my local hospital, even if you don't. Why don't we hear much about waiting times for hospital procedures these days? Gordon Brown is the reason...

still doesnt answer the question though , if he had saved during the boom , allowing him to weather the storm as we would have been better placed , he could then have theoreticaly won the last election and continued with the policies you mention above , so maybe you have indirectly just answered the question. short termism in a nutshell.

green

sunshinetours

Alan_Cross wrote: »

There is no point in 'belittling' people who deny the historical record. They do that quite well enough for themselves.

I repeat, history will record:

1. GB managed a successful economy for 10 years, better than anything ever managed before.

2. He was torpedoed by world events beyond his control

3. He played a major part in leading the intergovernmental, international fightback.

To which I will add:

4. He lost the 2010 election through a combination of 2. and the effects of a biased, Tory press.

Join the flat earthers and be in denial if you want. This merely confirms you have your own agenda which cannot tolerate the mention of such matters.

Just because you repeat it doesn't make it any more of a "FACT"

The fact is many in this country are indeed brainswashed Tory or Labour supporters and will defend anything and everything their beloved party does.
I guess part of this is when you become so ingrained into a way of thinking it kind of destroys your whole world when it dawns that actually, this isn't that great after all.

Having seen your posting style on other threads now, I shall leave the last word with you, as indeed you say your self there is no point in arguing with certain people

daveyjp

I'm afraid it's another announcement which won't get anywhere near achieving what MSE posters seem to think it will.

The benefits issue has taken decades to get to where we are now. Simply slashing benefits won't see everything become rosy by the end of this Parliament.

I just hope the Govt have thought through the wider social consequences of this policy.

Charlton_King

Alan_Cross wrote: »

All the closet Tories on here spend half of their posts denying the fact.

GB wanted to ensure the continuing reversal of appalling Tory underspending on the health and education services which 95% of the population uses. 17 years of Thatcherite policies had to be seen off.

I remember the state of my local school's roof and the unbelievable trolley queuing in my local hospital, even if you don't. Why don't we hear much about waiting times for hospital procedures these days? Gordon Brown is the reason...

Too bloody true.

With some, memories are either short - or suppressed.

chris_m

Alan_Cross wrote: »

I repeat, history will record:

1. GB managed a successful economy for 10 years, better than anything ever managed before.

Most of which he inherited from Ken Clarke and sensibly (but surprisingly) decided not to meddle with - at least, to start with.

ILW

Gordon brown spent 10 years spending more money than he was getting in. This will ALWAYS lead to a crash at some point, it is just a matter of when.

StevieJ

Percy1983 wrote: »

Yet again proven I was right to vote Tory this time.

Yet again they haven't done anything yet, except maybe p1ss off most of their stay at home mum voters.

ILW

StevieJ wrote: »

Yet again they haven't done anything yet, except maybe p1ss off most of their stay at home mum voters.

The more people they p1ss off is probably a good indication of how well they are tackling the problems.

Gloomy_Past_Bright_Future

Silverbull wrote: »

Not so in London.

500 wk cap will eat up rent and council tax with nothing left to live on.

They will have to move away from London.

Therefore will follow the biggest North/South divide, as all the benefit claimants realise they can rent a 4 bed in the North West for about £500pcm, yet in the South East it would cost about £1500 pcm.

Off they go "tup north", so that they can still have all the best gadgets, fags, booze etc etc.