I don't know what the opposition parties are waiting for. Dint they have the means to trigger an election with a no confidence vote in the current government?
Are they just holding off so they can have their summer holidays?
Are they just holding off so they can have their summer holidays?
In reply to Post #121
They can call one Mal but what's the point when you'll lose. The Tory's have no problem with regicide but no stomach for a GE.
They can call one Mal but what's the point when you'll lose. The Tory's have no problem with regicide but no stomach for a GE.
Things can get better again. They did before.
After the 2nd World War we had huge societal changes.
Unions got us safer health conditions. Weekends, holidays sick pay. We had the brand new NHS from cradle to grave. Council housing for the poor.
Sadly here and USA there has been a slow eroding of these advances. Generally orchestrated by people that already have Billions.
But I believe we can change for the better.
After the 2nd World War we had huge societal changes.
Unions got us safer health conditions. Weekends, holidays sick pay. We had the brand new NHS from cradle to grave. Council housing for the poor.
Sadly here and USA there has been a slow eroding of these advances. Generally orchestrated by people that already have Billions.
But I believe we can change for the better.
In reply to Post #120
I wasn't going to get involved but have to ask this.
Do you not think there was no need for some sort of austerity after the 2008 crash, we should've carried on spending, accelerating the debt and when covid came just carry on spending?
Not going to get in an argument, just would like you views please.
I wasn't going to get involved but have to ask this.
Do you not think there was no need for some sort of austerity after the 2008 crash, we should've carried on spending, accelerating the debt and when covid came just carry on spending?
Not going to get in an argument, just would like you views please.
In reply to Post #119
In reply to Post #124
Your post would have more credence if you substitute investment for spending Sir Blankalot
Your post would have more credence if you substitute investment for spending Sir Blankalot
In reply to Post #125
Those individuals within the NHS you have a continual problem with should be judged as individuals. The way and principle a public service , from Aberdeen to Wrexham, York to Yarmouth is run is a political decision. You choose that outcome.
Those individuals within the NHS you have a continual problem with should be judged as individuals. The way and principle a public service , from Aberdeen to Wrexham, York to Yarmouth is run is a political decision. You choose that outcome.
In reply to Post #124
Perhaps we should have, but one thing that is worth thinking about is which countries weathered the 2008 collapse the best and to look at how their economic models differed from the UK and the US - who basically created the problem.
For instance, we had some fairly significant quantitive easing here - basically printing vast amounts of money which was simply pumped back into the system (bailouts) whereas countries that fared better had much smarter fiscal policies, and in the years that followed, this included huge investment - often funded by borrowing at rock bottom interest rates - which has since paid off the original debts and been hugely profitable both financially and Geopolitically.
Instead, we cut, cut cut, made life even more difficult for the less well off, did not invest in our industries (even sold off many of the better ones to overseas investors) nor did we invest in our public services properly.
Unfortunately - and I am trying to keep politics out of this, because I don't want to argue either - Tory economic policy, traditionally, follows all of the known capitalist trends which simply does not benefit most normal people, those who are doing the work (e.g. me and you); it just makes the rich people richer, and the poor people unhappier, unhealthier and angrier.
The way the UK reacted to the 2008 crash probably sowed the seeds for Brexit; as so many people had suffered financially and emotionally (see above) for so long, and with papers like The Mail demonising foreign people relentlessly - often blaming them for our domestic issues (that largely stemmed from political decisions), then in hindsight it's no surprise we voted to leave, although in my opinion the whole process was flawed and could have been carried out in a way that was vastly less damaging than it has been, though that's another discussion, and probably one that nobody wants to have (including me).
Short version - Austerity didn't achieve a thing.
In 2010, our national debt was 63% of GDP, it has climbed ever since (despite austerity) and is now running at about 99% of GDP.
We should have invested massively when borrowing was cheap.
Just my view.
Perhaps we should have, but one thing that is worth thinking about is which countries weathered the 2008 collapse the best and to look at how their economic models differed from the UK and the US - who basically created the problem.
For instance, we had some fairly significant quantitive easing here - basically printing vast amounts of money which was simply pumped back into the system (bailouts) whereas countries that fared better had much smarter fiscal policies, and in the years that followed, this included huge investment - often funded by borrowing at rock bottom interest rates - which has since paid off the original debts and been hugely profitable both financially and Geopolitically.
Instead, we cut, cut cut, made life even more difficult for the less well off, did not invest in our industries (even sold off many of the better ones to overseas investors) nor did we invest in our public services properly.
Unfortunately - and I am trying to keep politics out of this, because I don't want to argue either - Tory economic policy, traditionally, follows all of the known capitalist trends which simply does not benefit most normal people, those who are doing the work (e.g. me and you); it just makes the rich people richer, and the poor people unhappier, unhealthier and angrier.
The way the UK reacted to the 2008 crash probably sowed the seeds for Brexit; as so many people had suffered financially and emotionally (see above) for so long, and with papers like The Mail demonising foreign people relentlessly - often blaming them for our domestic issues (that largely stemmed from political decisions), then in hindsight it's no surprise we voted to leave, although in my opinion the whole process was flawed and could have been carried out in a way that was vastly less damaging than it has been, though that's another discussion, and probably one that nobody wants to have (including me).
Short version - Austerity didn't achieve a thing.
In 2010, our national debt was 63% of GDP, it has climbed ever since (despite austerity) and is now running at about 99% of GDP.
We should have invested massively when borrowing was cheap.
Just my view.
In reply to Post #127
70% of the last 43 years: tory
100% of the last 12 years: tory
If that works for you and your loved ones
That's great
100% of the last 12 years: tory
If that works for you and your loved ones
That's great
In reply to Post #130
You can twists stats to suit your narrative, we do it on here, Westminster does it, everybody does it.
I'm sure the Tories could pull a stat out of the bag to say they have been investing in the last 12years.
Labour left office with a £811 billion deficit. I got that figure from the internet, so that could have been manipulated.
Whatever the figure it was a lot. Let's say Labour had got back in would they have continued spending and increasing the debt. If so I wonder what sort of investing would they have done and would it have been successful.
I don't blame the 2008 recession wholly on the government of the time, I thought Gordon Brown was doing ok for a while. Then again I don't blame the current government wholly for the current crisis.
If we have a GE and Labour get in I hope they do well but I'm not confident in that, but I'd still want them to do well, why wouldn't I?
Extracting money from the rich has always been a difficult task. Maybe the easy option for them would be to hit the easier to target, those PAYE people who earn just above the higher tax threshold who can't hide their money.
Just my ramblings, people can tell me that I'm wrong but I will refer them to my first sentence.
I'm sure the Tories could pull a stat out of the bag to say they have been investing in the last 12years.
Labour left office with a £811 billion deficit. I got that figure from the internet, so that could have been manipulated.
Whatever the figure it was a lot. Let's say Labour had got back in would they have continued spending and increasing the debt. If so I wonder what sort of investing would they have done and would it have been successful.
I don't blame the 2008 recession wholly on the government of the time, I thought Gordon Brown was doing ok for a while. Then again I don't blame the current government wholly for the current crisis.
If we have a GE and Labour get in I hope they do well but I'm not confident in that, but I'd still want them to do well, why wouldn't I?
Extracting money from the rich has always been a difficult task. Maybe the easy option for them would be to hit the easier to target, those PAYE people who earn just above the higher tax threshold who can't hide their money.
Just my ramblings, people can tell me that I'm wrong but I will refer them to my first sentence.
In reply to Post #129
Obviously
Obviously
In reply to Post #132
As you well know, the prospects for a country are heavily weighted by education.
Spending per pupil in England is still lower than it was in 2009, roughly about 7k per pupil in state schools. That's been a political decision by the Tory party. Meanwhile private education per pupil has risen over that period to roughly 15k, double the states evaluation of what spending is necessary for a good education.
Twist that investment/spending in our future with that damning stat in a positive way mate
As you well know, the prospects for a country are heavily weighted by education.
Spending per pupil in England is still lower than it was in 2009, roughly about 7k per pupil in state schools. That's been a political decision by the Tory party. Meanwhile private education per pupil has risen over that period to roughly 15k, double the states evaluation of what spending is necessary for a good education.
Twist that investment/spending in our future with that damning stat in a positive way mate
In reply to Post #134