How will you vote next week?

[LiberalFox]

43 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

She certainly presided over rapid economic reform, some of it eliminating outdated, inefficient institutions and practices. But an awful lot of babies got thrown out with the bathwater.

Old industrial areas were often abandoned and workers with "outdated" skills thrown on the scrapheap with nothing to replace what they had lost. That caused serious social problems in particular areas that still persist today in later generations.

 

There's even an argument that, while the unions might have been too powerful before Thatcher, they are now not powerful enough for our economic good (in the private sector, at least).

Declining real pay and lack of job security don't do much to encourage spending to boost the economy. That might be about to become an even bigger problem than it was 2008-2015, after a year or two of slight improvement in real pay.

Household debt is high, real pay falling - and lots of businesses surviving by having low pay offset their low productivity....not a model for success if times get tough. Stronger unions (within reason) can actually improve business efficiency/competitiveness.

Yeah I can see your point of view, I was merely pointing out where the Tories get their free run on economic competence. I like reading Thatcher's speeches, she was a fantastic politician. Only two PM's have been particularly radical in the post-war period. Attlee and Thatcher. I'd probably describe myself as a radical Liberal, I don't believe a government can change society overnight but I think a good government should hope to effect change on society that will remain after their time in power. Both the Attlee and Thatcher governments can claim to have done this. Attlee made Britain more socially liberal while Thatcher left it more economically liberal. I think most people who liked Thatcher aren't thinking in terms of specific economic indicators but in terms of ideology. 

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

Don't be quite so kind to the bloke, he ran a £42bn deficit when growth was at 3% in 2005.

Lets not forget the selling of the gold reserves as well.

 

We shouldn't blame Labour for the crash obviously, but they were reckless and profligate in those few years leading upto the crash. 

 

It was bizarre, families on £40,000 a year receiving tax credits.

[Guest Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Yep. It's ironic that some of the things for which Blair/Brown deserve criticism are things that the Tories supported or wanted more of, from deregulation of banks to the Iraq invasion (some Tories didn't even want to bother with a UN resolution). Labour were the Govt, though, so have to take the main blame for those actions......but accusations of massive over-spending are unfair. If they'd not piled money into the economy in 2008-09, banks would have gone bust and Christ knows what the consequences would have been for the economy, and for the people and firms who were customers of those banks.

 

I do wonder just how much impact it would have had if the UK hadn't deregulated its banking system so much. The problem started in the US - and ended up affecting other European countries whether or not they had deregulated.

We might have avoided some of the impact - so some blame is due - but much of the crash would have happened anyway due to the USA, I think (Clinton and Bush to blame on a political level, I think)

 

I don't understand where this train of thought comes from. You certainly can't say it comes from the people who study it hence the lack of quality papers out there on deregulation of the banks and the crisis. So Alf, if you have some genuine, credible sources that show the banking system were 'deregulated so much' then I'd like to see it. I actually think, in this country, it came from the head of the FSA to cover up its incompetence. 

I'd say regulation was just wrong. Some things have been too heavily regulated, for example the fact that Metro Bank was the first new high street bank for over 100 years can be blamed on heavy regulation to some extent. The fact that we rely on 4/5 banks to make up something like 80% of our system has been problematic. Hopefully fintechs like Monzo et al  (and a change in regulation) will help that.

[Guest Kopfkino]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

Lets not forget the selling of the gold reserves as well.

 

We shouldn't blame Labour for the crash obviously, but they were reckless and profligate in those few years leading upto the crash. 

 

It was bizarre, families on £40,000 a year receiving tax credits.

 

It always amuses me that you can't bring up Gordon Brown without someone mentioning him selling the gold. Yes he sold it at a low price, but I'm not entirely sure why people see selling the gold reserves as such a problem

[Foxxed]

I seriously haven't decided yet. It's unlikely to be Conservative since I want a healthy economic and a good, proactive international reputation.

 

Yet they're offering hand-waving unspecified new trade deals in an already declining economy now outside the world's largest trading block.

 

They're offering continued demonisation of the immigrants that teach our kids, bandage our wounds and clean our toilets.

 

They're offing political isolation and hiding behind the legs of a dwindling world power.

 

Since UKIP are giving votes to the Conservatives by tactically standing down in certain constituencies, paving the way for an all-powerful one-party state, I'll probably vote tactically too.

[Foxxed]

2 hours ago, KingGTF said:

 

I don't understand where this train of thought comes from. You certainly can't say it comes from the people who study it hence the lack of quality papers out there on deregulation of the banks and the crisis. So Alf, if you have some genuine, credible sources that show the banking system were 'deregulated so much' then I'd like to see it. I actually think, in this country, it came from the head of the FSA to cover up its incompetence. 

I'd say regulation was just wrong. Some things have been too heavily regulated, for example the fact that Metro Bank was the first new high street bank for over 100 years can be blamed on heavy regulation to some extent. The fact that we rely on 4/5 banks to make up something like 80% of our system has been problematic. Hopefully fintechs like Monzo et al  (and a change in regulation) will help that.

Thatcher's deregulation of the financial system - so called big bang deregulation - is wildly known.

 

Here's CityAM taking about it http://www.cityam.com/252351/big-bang-30-can-1986-hold-key-seizing-citys-brexit

 

Instead of calling Alf a liar you could have just googled "financial deregulation uk thatcher".

 

You can see it as great or awful but when the entire financial system screwed itself by trading in incredibly dodgy loans some may reasonably say "perhaps someone should have overseen this to stop it happening".

[Strokes]

3 hours ago, ramboacdc said:

please tell me what you put. 

It wasn't particularly profound or poetic, I just scribbled a bit of hate for each party  

[ousefox]

Doesn't tell us an awful lot but an interesting comparison nonetheless.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

 

 

It was bizarre, families on £40,000 a year receiving tax credits.

Miss those days.

 

 

[sphericalfox]

Looks pretty tight...

[Rincewind]

3 hours ago, Matt said:

 

This is also true but people are becoming wise to the political lie or skeptical of politicians so when an honest one comes along ways are found to discredit them as scandal sells more papers than honesty and integrity. 

[Monk]

It's between Torres and SNP here in East Lothian, so I'll be voting SNP. If I lived in England I'd vote labour. 

[Guest Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Foxxed said:

Thatcher's deregulation of the financial system - so called big bang deregulation - is wildly known.

 

Here's CityAM taking about it http://www.cityam.com/252351/big-bang-30-can-1986-hold-key-seizing-citys-brexit

 

Instead of calling Alf a liar you could have just googled "financial deregulation uk thatcher".

 

You can see it as great or awful but when the entire financial system screwed itself by trading in incredibly dodgy loans some may reasonably say "perhaps someone should have overseen this to stop it happening".

 

Oh yeah the fallacy of the big bang. Where Thatcher took the City away from an old boys club that relied on private regulation to being regulated by the government. Doesn't seem like deregulation to me. A 3000 word essay summed up

[Great Boos Up]

I'm Charnwood, so anything slightly to the right of Attila the Hun as I am a knuckle dragging racist sexist homophobe fascist xenophobe reptile of a man as I was told once because I thought about voting out of Europe but didn't vote as the issue was too complicated. Any political thinking that throws that my way and I'll forever vote the complete opposite.

Or just not bother and draw a big phallus with very hairy dangly bits and smirk for the rest of the day knowing some well to do member of the community has had to look at it.

[Dr The Singh]

Corbyn has time to convince me, I have 2 kids due to go uni in 3-4 years, which will save me around £50k

[Nickfosse]

11 hours ago, Thracian said:

So why do you vote Labour out of interest?

They patronise the working man but I've not noticed them running the kind of economy that would ever do them a lot of good. and they didn't even give them chance to own their own council houses as I recall when the chance was there and "the workers" could make some real money.

What has Laboiur really done for working people except ensure the "working class" label is stuck on them like a definition that confines them for life as "our gang" members.   

Everything that has enabled me to fulfill my potential has been either provided or supported by the Labour Party. 

As a working class lad growing up in a council house in the East Midlands the very roof above my head was provided by Labour initiated social housing. The magnificent Comprehensive education that enabled me to gain a place at Cambridge and mix with people of all social backgrounds. The NHS that brought me into the world and keeps me well. 

If the Conservative party had been in constant government for the last century my life would be greatly impoverished in comparison. 

[Thracian]

6 minutes ago, Nickfosse said:

Everything that has enabled me to fulfill my potential has been either provided or supported by the Labour Party. 

As a working class lad growing up in a council house in the East Midlands the very roof above my head was provided by Labour initiated social housing. The magnificent Comprehensive education that enabled me to gain a place at Cambridge and mix with people of all social backgrounds. The NHS that brought me into the world and keeps me well. 

If the Conservative party had been in constant government for the last century my life would be greatly impoverished in comparison. 

Sounds to me as if you'd have coped perfectly well whatever. 

[Thracian]

5 hours ago, MattP said:

Lets not forget the selling of the gold reserves as well.

 

We shouldn't blame Labour for the crash obviously, but they were reckless and profligate in those few years leading upto the crash. 

 

It was bizarre, families on £40,000 a year receiving tax credits.

The gold sell-off was recklessly irresponsible - he got so much expert advice warning him against it, yet sold at a ridiculously low price.  A little later the price surged as we all knew it would.    

 

[Nickfosse]

Just now, Thracian said:

Sounds to me as if you'd have coped perfectly well whatever. 

That is very kind of you, but I am immensely grateful for the opportunities that Labour political history has given me in my lifetime. 

That's not to say that I have agreed with every Labour policy, and there are some Conservative politicians that I have great respect for. 

[Spudulike]

It's not in my DNA to vote Conservative. However, the thought of a coalition involving the SNP makes my blood run cold and I'm now struggling.

 

I won't vote Lib Dem, UKIP, Green etc. It'll either be red, Blue (whilst I hold my nose), or a spoilt paper.

[BoyJones]

I was in senior banking management taking early retirement at the turn of the century (paid me too much) and new policy dictated preferably at Barclays that no manager over 40 in branch positions. 

 

Much discussion at the time in our circles as to whether GB did it on purpose for some ulterior motive, because in effect he threw away £4-5 billion pounds, enough to build countless hospitals, motorways etc. 

 

He presumably is an intelligent man, but it would be interesting to know why he sanctioned selling over our half our gold reserves for no apparent reason. We could have raised the money by selling more gilts or borrowing in the market. 

 

One of the strangest decisions in banking / government history, which he has got away with extremely lightly.

 

 

 

 

[Thracian]

I've actually kept well away from much of the pre-election debate because I can't abide listening to hecklers but I listened to most of the question and answer programme tonight featuring the two main party leaders. 

 

May was her usual boringly predictable self while Corbyn tried to convince us he'll be leading a  utopian government in which he buys the popular vote rather like the Pied Piper leading kids to destruction but all I could see were policies that will leave the economy in ruins while inflation rages all around us. 

 

It's wonderful in theory to chuck as much money as you can, or more likely can't afford, into public services but to do so while alienating the wealth creators is a form of economic lunacy and while all sorts of people might believe they'll be better off they'll soon discover an all-to familiar truth when it comes to Labour's management of money they haven't got and won't ever get in sufficient quantity without going massively further into debt. .

 

For me a brain and business drain will be inevitable and any fruits of added investment will be too late coming before any notabe financial benefits seeps through, notwithstanding the further pressures on services which will be guaranteed by the loosest of brakes on immigration.

 

Corbyn continued to be a wriggler on a few subjects but on defence he was worse than pathetic even though I fundamentally agree with his outlook that jaw has to be better than war and we've not been very effective with either in recent years.

 

Certainly they could do away with Trident under Corbyn because the world would know it would be pointless us having it, but he sounded childishly naive when it comes to national defence especially given the lunatics out there in the world today and the potential threats from all kinds of directions.

 

Still, Corbyn's approach would be to die first and talk (presumably) through paradisian spokesmen thereafter....or perhaps to simply give the nation away to whoever turned up first, or perhaps even by invitation if they were Marxist socialists with big enough muscles because I really saw no indication he'd ever fight our corner physically, with any great conviction, nor mentally with any great strength.

 

Overall I was left thinking May is the only politician remotely equipped to negotiate Brexit and that for our economy's sake she was the only choice for all that I actually believe it's as almost as grim a choice as choosing to die by hanging or by the electric chair. Neither has much appeal and what's left is hardly worth mentioning.   

 

  

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

  .   

 

                

[Rincewind]

Sure it may be an Utopian dream but if the City players had listened to the 'expert/pundits' they would not have won the League title. I would like to see a fairer Britain, not for me but for the young who are our future and I am damn sure May is unlikely to offer that.

I am realistic enough to realise that if by some fluke Labour do get in there will no doubt be some excuse as to why they cannot deliver everything, 'The cupboards bare' Theres not as much as we thought, Brexit cost has gone up, 'MP's need a pay rise. etc. But as the song goes, Two out of Three Aint bad.

 

Just thought of an old saying which goes some way to explain why some politicians avoid answering questions,do not give straight answers, or avoid being asked anything at all,

 

'Ask me no questions and I will tell you no lies.'

 

Some are very skilled at it. Posters have asked on here 'Why does he not give a straight answer. Now you know.

And with that bedtime thought I bid you goodnight.

 

[Guest Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, BoyJones said:

I was in senior banking management taking early retirement at the turn of the century (paid me too much) and new policy dictated preferably at Barclays that no manager over 40 in branch positions. 

 

Much discussion at the time in our circles as to whether GB did it on purpose for some ulterior motive, because in effect he threw away £4-5 billion pounds, enough to build countless hospitals, motorways etc. 

 

He presumably is an intelligent man, but it would be interesting to know why he sanctioned selling over our half our gold reserves for no apparent reason. We could have raised the money by selling more gilts or borrowing in the market. 

 

One of the strangest decisions in banking / government history, which he has got away with extremely lightly.

 

 

 

 

 

But it wasn't a money raising exercise. Brown, and most others these day, doesn't see gold as a useful reserve for a government to hold, so he sold it and used the money to buy foreign currency reserves. 

 

You can question the price maybe

[Nalis]

I'm voting Labour even though it would more beneficial to me personally to vote Tory.