Politics

[Never Outgunned]

Funny I thought the less well of areas tended to vote left wing

Generally out of historical tribalism more then anything else. If tribal voting collapsed tomorrow labour would be dead in the water.

No tribal voting in Tory areas then?

It doesnt take many socialist principles to fuck up everything. People on the left consistently make the mistake of viewing the deregulation of the banks in the late 90s and the massive expansion of the money supply as a product of thatchers enduring legacy. It was not. Thatcher was a monetarist and the first rule of monetarism is to control the supply of money. The bubble which burst in 2008 was created because politicians like clinton and brown saw an opportunity to create a massive economic boom through deregulation and credit expansion, the proceeds of which could be used to bloat the public sector and feather their electoral nests. A few years back there were leaked emails between alan greenspan and gordon brown dated 1997 which more or less stated this.

And you have Brown down as a socialist do you?

Isn't Clinton a bit far off in the distance on this one? You had 8 years of Bush spending ridiculous amounts on invading countries while giving tax breaks to the rich leaving literally nothing left in the pot for the incoming Democrat. Clinton left Bush with a budget surplus - which oddly we had too in 2001.

Probably because the tories usually come in to power just after labour has done its job of fucking everything up. One thing i will credit Labour with is they are very good at propping up an economy just about long enough for them to be safely out of power by the time the restructuring has to start.

You could say the same for the Tories in 1974, or Reginald Mauldling's cocky 'sorry to leave the place in such a mess' comment in 1964.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200608140051

The Tories also benefitted from the work of the Labour government of 1945-51 in stabilising the country after the war.

There will be no growth under either party for the forseeable future because we are still due a massive recession which we've delayed and stored up for a few years longer. The west should have taken the hit back in 2009 but instead we printed more money and propped up a failed system. Capitalism is in many ways a simple system - you fuck it up you pay the price, we cant defy gravity forever.

But a lesson learned by Keynes in the 30s is that a recession can perpetuate itself without a degree of stimulus.

One big collective belt tightening and no-one is spending money, those still in jobs get turfed out of jobs and have less cash in their pockets to spend.

The depression of the 30s was only really resolved by WW2 and post war rebuilding, it didn't resolve itself naturally through laissez faire.

[Never Outgunned]

Look - I work for a Bank. I work for the Retail part of a Bank, which deals with small businesses that are in financial difficulty. I re-structure these businesses, I offer them financial advice and I lend them more money if they can afford it. I keep people in jobs by not choosing to close businesses down that are failing.

But there were plenty of small business that went to the wall in 2008/09 because banks were refusing to lend to them.

On the other hand I agree that Investment Banks fucked up an awful lot. However, what you need to understand is that the Government allowed this crisis in a way.

Yes I'm well aware of that. Lack of regulation and laissez faire economics created the mess, however the politicians of the last 30 years have bent over backwards to appease the financial sector even at the expense of the industrial base of the country - it's exactly what the bankers wanted. This incumbent government isn't a deviation from that path, that party is literally bankrolled by the financial sector.

[MadRich]

I vote for something if one of them directly affected me, e.g NHS, student tuitions, or transport cost I dont earn enough to be concerned about the higher tax rate.

My opinion of all the main Politcal parties is they are pretty much the same:

Would have gone to war.

Would have encouraged immigration, I mean I find it hard to believe the
Tories refusing cheap foreign Labour.

The housing bubble was worldwide. Find it hard the Tories would have restricted more people from owning homes through cheap loans.

And i find it hard to believe the Tories would have encouraged MORE banking regulations if they were in power.

I voted Lib Dem MP because my MP does a lot for the community, you can see him all the time, also he was 1 of 2 NOT involved with the expenses scandal, voted Boris because Ken didn't offer any new ideas.
Prefer Cameron because he is the less of the 2 evils between him and Brown. And to some extent that joke they call Ed.

[Henry Norris 1913]

Libertarian Left


Economic Left/Right: -1.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21

[Never Outgunned]

Probably right in most circumstances but i find that too many people are never subjected to different views and interpretations of events and challenged to think about things in depth.

Well considering that the mainstream media in the UK is so overwhelmingly right of centre, that's an accusation more true of the right than the left of the spectrum in the UK.

[frankbutcher]

Look - I work for a Bank. I work for the Retail part of a Bank, which deals with small businesses that are in financial difficulty. I re-structure these businesses, I offer them financial advice and I lend them more money if they can afford it. I keep people in jobs by not choosing to close businesses down that are failing.

But there were plenty of small business that went to the wall in 2008/09 because banks were refusing to lend to them.

On the other hand I agree that Investment Banks fucked up an awful lot. However, what you need to understand is that the Government allowed this crisis in a way.

Yes I'm well aware of that. Lack of regulation and laissez faire economics created the mess, however the politicians of the last 30 years have bent over backwards to appease the financial sector even at the expense of the industrial base of the country - it's exactly what the bankers wanted. This incumbent government isn't a deviation from that path, that party is literally bankrolled by the financial sector.

Small businesses need to be supported. However there are an awful lot that are basically bust. It makes no sense to lend them more money if they are not going to be able to pay it back. Believe me, I work with about 30 businesses at any one time, and most of them are bust in one way or other. Most of them owe the Revenue fortunes. So in a way, you are paying for them to keep going. It's not the Banks that are the bad guys in most situations. They are bad businesses, run by bad business people. I do my utmost to keep them going though.

The Banking sector has been pandered to. I would agree with that strongly. What else can the Government do? Thatcher sold off all of the industries that actually made things in the 80s. Britain is a Services-led economy. We are the Financial hub of the world. We need to stay strong here as the recovery is not going to come from anywhere else. The Tories and Labour are over a barrell.....

[LDB]

No tribal voting in Tory areas then?

In some areas there probably is but the main tory voter base is the aspirational working classes and lower-middle classes. People that get on and do things in life and not just sit around looking for someone else to blame. These people would abandon the party in a flash if they felt it was no longer working for them - as they did in 1997. Without all the northern constituencies and jockland where everyone votes labour "because our family always vote labour" the party would be utterly fucked. I cant wait for the UK to break up - less chance of these cretins ever ruling England again.

And you have Brown down as a socialist do you?

Ab-so-fucking-lutely

Isn't Clinton a bit far off in the distance on this one?

Not really - go look at who first deregulated the American housing market so he could get his black & hispanic voter base into home ownership with ultimately unaffordable mortgages.

You had 8 years of Bush spending ridiculous amounts on invading countries while giving tax breaks to the rich leaving literally nothing left in the pot for the incoming Democrat. Clinton left Bush with a budget surplus - which oddly we had too in 2001.

Yes and Bush was an utter cretin too. Through these ludicrous and massively expensive wars the USA has somehow managed to snatch decline from the jaws of enduring domination and prosperity. Just because i am of the right it doesn't mean i will leap to defence of every right wing politician. No tribalism here

We had a surplus in 2001 because brown wanted to con people into viewing him as prudent by sticking to tory spending plans for one term of office... And then all hell broke loose.

The Tories also benefitted from the work of the Labour government of 1945-51 in stabilising the country after the war.

And in doing so created the post-war consensus which ended up contributing significantly to the stagnation of our economy in the 1970s. The post-war consensus was an important and necessary step but the mistake was in viewing it as anything other then a temporary rebuilding measure, of which many gutless tories pre-thatcher were guilty of - especially that shyster heath.

But a lesson learned by Keynes in the 30s is that a recession can perpetuate itself without a degree of stimulus.

One big collective belt tightening and no-one is spending money, those still in jobs get turfed out of jobs and have less cash in their pockets to spend.

The depression of the 30s was only really resolved by WW2 and post war rebuilding, it didn't resolve itself naturally through laissez faire.

Demand stimulation can be important but really you cant be doing it from a starting position of massive deficit. At least in the 30s governments had been racking up massive surpluses and weren't paying tens of billions a year in state debt interest payments alone.

[Never Outgunned]

Thatcher sold off all of the industries that actually made things in the 80s.

If you acknowledge this point then why do you believe the socialists are to blame?

[frankbutcher]

Thatcher sold off all of the industries that actually made things in the 80s.

If you acknowledge this point then why do you believe the socialists are to blame?

They had to be sold off as they weren't efficient any more. The private sector is always more efficient.

[Never Outgunned]

No tribal voting in Tory areas then?

In some areas there probably is but the main tory voter base is the aspirational working classes and lower-middle classes. People that get on and do things in life and not just sit around looking for someone else to blame.

You're convieniently over looking a Powellite/Alf Garnett Working Class Tory tendency who don't have two ha' pennies to rub together and are also pretty quick to blame others.

These people would abandon the party in a flash if they felt it was no longer working for them - as they did in 1997.

You're convieniently overlooking this tendency in the Labour party also, plenty of socialists left the party during the Blair years, it's membership halved during this time. They actually won with less votes in 2001 than they lost with in 1979 and 1992.

You're also over looking things like the SDP split in 1981 which had a worse effect on Labour than the Tories post 1997.

Without all the northern constituencies and jockland where everyone votes labour "because our family always vote labour" the party would be utterly fucked.

Again the Tories have their equivalent that you seemingly overlook.

Not really - go look at who first deregulated the American housing market so he could get his black & hispanic voter base into home ownership with ultimately unaffordable mortgages.

Most economic thinking doesn't believe there was enough of these mortgages sold to have been attributable to this current crisis.

Yes and Bush was an utter cretin too. Through these ludicrous and massively expensive wars the USA has somehow managed to snatch decline from the jaws of enduring domination and prosperity. Just because i am of the right it doesn't mean i will leap to defence of every right wing politician. No tribalism here We had a surplus in 2001 because brown wanted to con people into viewing him as prudent by sticking to tory spending plans for one term of office... And then all hell broke loose.

And nothing to do with spending money on unwinnable wars which just so coincidently started in 2001.

Nothing to do with overdue investment in public infrastructure.

As for hell breaking loose, our public debts were quite low for a first world country - the hell broke loose in 2008.

Demand stimulation can be important but really you cant be doing it from a starting position of massive deficit. At least in the 30s governments had been racking up massive surpluses and weren't paying tens of billions a year in state debt interest payments alone.

Though no Keynesian economics were put into action by the UK government during the 30s and when we reverted to it in 1945 we had a level of debt far more than what we have now [/quote]

[Never Outgunned]

Thatcher sold off all of the industries that actually made things in the 80s.

If you acknowledge this point then why do you believe the socialists are to blame?

They had to be sold off as they weren't efficient any more. The private sector is always more efficient.

There were plenty in private sector industry that went to the wall because Thatcher wanted to keep the pound high to please the financial sector, making ou exports uncompetitative.

Also, by destroying the coal industry it costed Britain more to run its electricity generators on imported oil and gas

[cameron326]

The Labour party is made up of smug, do as I say not as I do, hypocrites, while the Conservative is made up of plain nasty, smug, elitists.

Take your pick.

[Never Outgunned]

The Labour party is made up of smug, do as I say not as I do, hypocrites, while the Conservative is made up of plain nasty, smug, elitists.

Take your pick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrjWALYlH0A

[DB10GOONER]

WE ARE PLAYING THE FUCKING SCUM TODAY AND YOU POOFS WANT TO TALK ABOUT BOLLOTICS??!!!

BASEFUCKINGMENT.

Shower of Davemelts.

[arseofacrow]

Council houses.....

Big difference between Thatcher giving people a stake in society and an opportunity to better one's self. Labour have just created millions of state non-jobs and overseen a massive increase in state handouts. All that Labour have created is dependents on the welfare state, not wealth creaters like Thatcher did.

A stake in society
One person says tomato....

Created dependants on the welfare state? Well, Thatcher never did th...oh

You have your angle Frank, I see that, and your arguments come that that angle. As you wrote earlier, it's a question of viewpoint and I'm not so keen to argue about a system that I see as rotten to the core, and that infuriates me so much.

That's why I said at the outset that when it comes to Politics it's best to agree to disagree. Even the tone of your post above is condescending and arrogant as you believe that you're right and I'm wrong.

What's the point of even debating these points? Politics is not about ideology. Politics is about power. Simple as that.

Which post is condascending and arrogant? These things are the further things from my mind, and who I am.

I do not believe that I have the complete truth...no-one does. I simply responded to a statement of your's Frank, and how I see the situation.

If you really see the posts that way then sorry. But I then generally think you need to reassess how you evaluate what people are saying, as you have completely misconstrued something.

That bit ^

Is that it? Really?

I refer you to my last paragraph above then. It's a form of disagreement, as you wll know Frank.

If you find that condascending and arrogant Frank - then you yourself are off the charts in this respect.