I ... enjoyed your post, bootsam! If I had to say whether I agreed or disagreed with it, with no in-between, I'd have to say I agree. The only hesitation I feel is for your Aunt - I don't know the lady in question - but one cannot help but draw conclusions based upon her choice of gutter rag, er, newspaper. Heh.
Ignoring the comment about God helping us which is slightly unlikely as he/she/it is just a figment of somebody`s imagination, which bit of the post was hilarious ? I`m not tied to any party and have voted for 4 different parties since the early 80`s but most of the post was accurate I think. The BBC admits to being on the left. The last Labour government were hardly shining examples of competence based on the state they left the country in after 13 years. Not saying the Conservatives are the political equivalent of Lionel Messi and they don't have my support either but the thought of Labour winning in 2015 is not a happy one .
:biggrin: Loz, I know. You cant choose your family I'm afraid. She is a sweet person to me but she has racist views which I abhor. She is elderly and wont change or see reason. She also thought Thatcher was a Saint. But her Sunday roasts are terrific and she is very kind to me. I know a few racists/bigots who are actually nice people in general, their views aside. Thus I don't hate or dislike people whose views are diametrically opposite to mine (Piers Morgan being the exception). I just try to softly explain some things. Like why racist is daft, pointless and self defeating. The black guy you hate may be the very same guy in the future who saves your life as a doctor or gives you a job. A persons creed, colour, gender, sexuality etc is irrelevant. Its their intentions, actions and deeds that count. Mohammed Ali was black. As a wee child I thought he was the greatest. I still do. He is also a Muslim. I still think he's the greatest. I had his pics on my wall and I think my adoration for him shaped me as a wee white Scottish kid. How can I hate Black people or people who are Muslim when my hero is both? I absolutely adore him still as an old jock nearing his fifties. I understand that not all Mail reader are nutters. I was being a generalist and a bit silly. But some of their headlines make me wince.
What you say is correct Glidd but just look at a graph of government spending and the growing debt mountain and see when it took off. Prior to that point it was arguably manageable, in the same way that Pete would have us believe that today's debt is manageable. One little reported sound bite to come out of the Conservative Party Conference was that they expect to run a surplus in the next parliament. Osborne implied it and Fallon said it. How they will achieve it, assuming they get the opportunity to try, remains to be seen.
This is the party conference season. During its own conference, each party gets to hog the headlines exclusively for a few days, and get its points across uninterrupted. Usually. The Daily Mail article abusing Ralph Milliband (deceased) has had the curious effect of putting the Labour leader at the top of the news during the Conservative conference (sic),as well as garnering for him expressions of support from all sides - including David Cameron and Nick Clegg. So opportune and so advantageous to Ed Milliband is this story, one cannot help wondering if it is all a put-up job. Surely not; Paul Dacre would never go along with it. Would he?
Did the smear job backfire, or was it always meant to work in this fashion? ... is what you're asking. A good question.
The only time there has been a surplus in recent years was 1997-2001, and it was achieved by Gordon Brown. So three cheers for Gordon then, and it is quite interesting to see George Osborne hoping to emulate him, by 2020. Maybe, but I think Osborne is being rather over-optimistic, though, if he thinks he can manage to do what Brown did.
Let's all hope he doesn't do what Brown did! In all my years, I have not witnessed such a monumental catastrophy as the state of the UK economy when Brown left!
Pete, that is outrageous, even for you. Gordon Brown came to power and inherited a sound economy, he agreed to follow the previous Conservative governments spending plans for 2 (or was it 3 years). It was only after he started his own expansion of the client state that spending soared.
It is one of the first rules of politics that if you are at the helm when a disaster happens (like a hurricane, an earthquake, or a worldwide banking collapse), it is your fault. No matter what you do to contain the disaster, to prevent it turning into a total collapse, and to lead the recovery - the disaster was your fault, and you get the blame. Everyone who goes into politics understands this.
Bootsam, seems like it's you who are a 'rabid' (your word) extremist based on what you are portraying of yourself in your posts but at the other end of the scale from your aunt! Get a life, chill out. Things are never simply black and white in life.
This is a comedy graph, designed to confuse. Try finding a graph which: (a) strips inflation out of the figures; and (b) shows the accumulated debt as a percentage of GDP. The value of a billion pounds in 1900 or 1950 has nothing to do with the value of a billion pounds in 2013. And a debt of a billion pounds in 1900 would have been gigantic compared to GDP at the time; a debt of a billion pounds today is tiny compared to today's GDP. Certainly the annual deficit today (getting on for 6% of GDP) is far too large given very little growth. Obviously if the economy was growing at 2%, 3% or 4% per year then a deficit of 6% would not seem so bad, or be so intractable. It is the glacially slow recovery from the last downturn that is the chief current problem. There have been many downturns over the years, but the recent one has had a slower recovery than most. If we think we've got problems, look at Japan. Their accumulated debt is proportionately nearly three times ours (sic), and getting worse. The Japanese economy has now become an example of what to avoid. I never expected to have to say that.
The big bump in the graph happens over the last 10 years or so and goes from approx. 350 ish billion to almost 1500 billion so around a 400% increase in a single decade. I don't know the inflation figures over the same decade but am confident it was less than 400% unless you live closer to Robert Mugabe than expected ! GDP wont have changed a lot over the last 10 years either, a few years of growth and a few years of shrinkage.
Designed to confuse indeed What I challenged you on was your assertion that Gordon Brown was responsible the last time the Uk ran a surplus. It was on his watch but he reaped the benefit of work done previously by the Conservatives.
