10b more welfare cuts on the way.

CLAPTON

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

In spring 2010 under Labour the country was on the brink of bankruptcy. Now it isn't. Unexpected external factors could turn things for the worse, but that not controllable. Labour is doing a good job of duping the gullible into forgetting what an unholy shambles they created and turning blame onto the ones who have been trying to sort it out.

bankruptcy is the state of not being able to pay one's bills.

in 2010, interest rates were very low as the international community was very very willing to lend us money.

we had no problem paying our bills and so were not even remotely near bankruptcy.

andyroberts1967

It's a long time between now and the General Election of 2015, but if we haven't come out of this recession and seen a marked improvement in living standards by then, I will definitely be voting for Labour, because I think that 5 years is long enough for the austerity programme to either have worked or to have been proven a failure. I'd like to hope that the Coalition policy will be working by then, but I have my doubts, and they grow bigger by the day.

BertieUK

andyroberts1967 wrote: »

It's a long time between now and the General Election of 2015, but if we haven't come out of this recession and seen a marked improvement in living standards by then, I will definitely be voting for Labour, because I think that 5 years is long enough for the austerity programme to either have worked or to have been proven a failure. I'd like to hope that the Coalition policy will be working by then, but I have my doubts, and they grow bigger by the day.

The truth is the ideas that they are chosing to get us out of the so called 'mess' are not working.

Within the Conservative party its a case of 'too many cooks are spoiling the broth'

There is hardly an issuse that they have not tampered with since taking office that is working, we are standing still in the corner going nowhere.

If only they had dealt with issues in a more adult way, instead of going at everything like a bull at a gate, we might be seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.

All we hear is the old excuse of we 'inherited' this mess but the truth is they have not got a clue how to get out of it.

grizzly1911

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

In spring 2010 under Labour the country was on the brink of bankruptcy. Now it isn't. Unexpected external factors could turn things for the worse, but that not controllable. Labour is doing a good job of duping the gullible into forgetting what an unholy shambles they created and turning blame onto the ones who have been trying to sort it out.

We are in the same position now as in spring 2010, probably worse. As Clapton says as people are continue to lend to us at rock bottom rates. they still think we have assets worth stripping.

Labour did not cause the GFC. They just happened to be in the hot seat when the manure hit the fan. The money has been running out for decades. There are just fewer piggy banks to raid now.

Certainly the last term under Labour was poor, but no different to previous runs where one party had been in too long. The leaderships weaken and the fall over themselves like marathon runners when blood sugar levels collapse.

The present lot have created enough of their own shambles without the need for any finger pointing.

angrypirate

grizzly1911 wrote: »

We are in the same position now as in spring 2010, probably worse. As Clapton says as people are continue to lend to us at rock bottom rates. they still think we have assets worth stripping.

Labour did not cause the GFC. They just happened to be in the hot seat when the manure hit the fan. The money has been running out for decades. There are just fewer piggy banks to raid now.

Certainly the last term under Labour was poor, but no different to previous runs where one party had been in too long. The leaderships weaken and the fall over themselves like marathon runners when blood sugar levels collapse.

The present lot have created enough of their own shambles without the need for any finger pointing.

Of course Labour didnt cause the "bust" - it was inevitable. Boom and busts are a natural occurance in capitalist markets due to the greedy nature of people.

Labour did contribute towards it being a great financial crises and what is worse is that they didnt PREPARE for it.

Gordon Brown self admittedly said "I have ended Boom and Bust". He said "I will not let house prices go out of control". Two of his biggest lies. Now the !!!!!! doesnt even turn up to parliament. I would be fuming if i were in his constituency.

Labour continued running the budget at a deficit even in the boom years. They sold the UKs gold at record low price IN THE BOOM YEARS. As Daniel Hanan once said - he refused to fix the roof when the sun was shining.

And then to top it off, when toxic banks failed they ploughed in money to stop them failing. Which meant other banks didnt have to worry about being careful and not failing because they knew that as long as they remained big enough, the UK Government would rescue them.

If the budget deficit had been smaller in the boom years, there would have been more money in the kitty for the government to spend on projects during the GFC years. Instead they chose to run with a country whose public sector contributed more towards the GDP than the private sector. You dont have to be a genius to figure out that is unsustainable.

coastline

angrypirate wrote: »

Of course Labour didnt cause the "bust" - it was inevitable. Boom and busts are a natural occurance in capitalist markets due to the greedy nature of people.

Labour did contribute towards it being a great financial crises and what is worse is that they didnt PREPARE for it.

Gordon Brown self admittedly said "I have ended Boom and Bust". He said "I will not let house prices go out of control". Two of his biggest lies. Now the !!!!!! doesnt even turn up to parliament. I would be fuming if i were in his constituency.

Labour continued running the budget at a deficit even in the boom years. They sold the UKs gold at record low price IN THE BOOM YEARS. As Daniel Hanan once said - he refused to fix the roof when the sun was shining.

And then to top it off, when toxic banks failed they ploughed in money to stop them failing. Which meant other banks didnt have to worry about being careful and not failing because they knew that as long as they remained big enough, the UK Government would rescue them.

If the budget deficit had been smaller in the boom years, there would have been more money in the kitty for the government to spend on projects during the GFC years. Instead they chose to run with a country whose public sector contributed more towards the GDP than the private sector. You dont have to be a genius to figure out that is unsustainable.

PREPARE is highlighted in bold in your reply...well here is the Tory answer to the situation..it doesn't matter whos in power does it...yet theres millons out there who believe its all to do with Labour and Tory..;)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6975536.stm

BertieUK

Many thanks for finding that link which really puts things into perspective.

I think that some of the present forum 'posters' hoped that their past comments were history, and were clouded by the bust that was, according to many posters on here 'all Labours fault' so maybe now they will come up with more sarcastic excuses.

coastline

BertieUK wrote: »

Many thanks for finding that link which really puts things into perspective.

I think that some of the present forum 'posters' hoped that their past comments were history, and were clouded by the bust that was, according to many posters on here 'all Labours fault' so maybe now they will come up with more sarcastic excuses.

Can anyone explain why they had a huge budget deficit in the 1990's...never has any government tried to run a budget surplus just incase theres a rainy day...even Nigel Lawson said you can't stop boom and bust..
To be honest I don't care who's in power...you can't get a fag paper between the lot of them...

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/47530000/gif/_47530170_uk_budget2010_466x345.gif

ILW

We are still spending way too much on the public sector. Until every state employee has to demonstrate why they are worth what they are being paid, it will never get sorted.

Example - Pay half a million to a failed BBC exec for less than two months work.

CLAPTON

ILW wrote: »

We are still spending way too much on the public sector. Until every state employee has to demonstrate why they are worth what they are being paid, it will never get sorted.

Example - Pay half a million to a failed BBC exec for less than two months work.

well the BBC is something we can all do something about

with internet TV in catch mode being totally legal one doesn't need a TV license anymore