Was Gordon Brown right.?

[JamboAl]

Cameron says we are now out of the danger zone. At the same time, Ken Clarke warns of a double dip recession.

So, given that any Tory decisions have not yet filtered through to our economic results, one presumes GB and Darling took the correct action in the face of the worst world economic crisis for yonks. He also says the cut-backs may not be as bad as feared suggesting he is back tracking to Labour's longer term approach and softening his own. Or indeed is it that Liam and co are digging their heels in about cuts in their back yards and DC hasn't the balls to carry things through as he sees/saw it?

[Guest John Meurig Thomas]

That's an interesting question and I wish I knew more about Economics to be able to comment properly. Perhaps someone could point me in the right direction so I can read about it and make my mind up?

[Johanes de Silentio]

I think he was right, and paid the price for it - there's a difference between adopting a popular policy and adopting the right policy.

 

I never thought that Brown did much wrong - I thought he was in a no-win situation.

[rossthejambo]

I think he was right, and paid the price for it - there's a difference between adopting a popular policy and adopting the right policy.

 

I never thought that Brown did much wrong - I thought he was in a no-win situation.

 

I think you could be right, he was honest about the recession and what it would take to get out of it.

 

Cameron and co said what the public wanted to hear in order to get into office. No doubt about that. And ever since they've been firing shots at Labour for months about the state of the economy and, whilst the Labour party aren't blameless, I'm still to hear what the ConLib coalition have actually done to sort this mess out apart from speculating huge cuts across the public sector. Have they actually done anything to cut the deficit yet?

 

I get the impression they're still blaming Labour to cover up their arses because they know what's going to come is going to be devastating to the majority of the British public.

[Ulysses]

That's an interesting question and I wish I knew more about Economics to be able to comment properly. Perhaps someone could point me in the right direction so I can read about it and make my mind up?

 

There's a fella in Glasgow who thinks you can solve all of the world's problems by taking paintings off rich people and selling them. Sounds good to me, as I'm not rich.

 

Mind you, he's not an economist. He's an anthropologist. And he can't do primary-level arithmetic. I doubt he'd impress Gordon Brown - he certainly didn't impress me. I can't recall his name, but the OP could tell you.

 

Ah well, I guess that's not much help to you. Sorry.

 

Back to the main topic, Gordon Brown was wrong. He did the wrong thing for the right reasons, but he was still wrong. All IMO, of course.

[Danny Wilde]

No.

 

20-20 hindsight revisionism won't alter the fact that it was Brown as chancellor who authored the UK's structural deficit.

[Johanes de Silentio]

There's a fella in Glasgow who thinks you can solve all of the world's problems by taking paintings off rich people and selling them. Sounds good to me, as I'm not rich.

 

Mind you, he's not an economist. He's an anthropologist. And he can't do primary-level arithmetic. I doubt he'd impress Gordon Brown - he certainly didn't impress me. I can't recall his name, but the OP could tell you.

 

 

Sounds like a plan - well, a good start, anyway!

[A Boy Named Crow]

No, no he wasn't. He presided over the growth of the monumerntal debt and as a away of rescuing the situation he promoted spending which would be financed by...more debt! He was also wrong to hike NI - effectively a tax on jobs, to plunder our pensions and to force through the illegal purchase of HBoS by Lloyds TSB against the wishes of shareholders on both sides. My dinner is ready so I have stop there, but there is no figure in UK politics makes me angrier than Gordon Brown - and yes I am old enough to remember Thatcher...

[Ulysses]

Sounds like a plan - well, a good start, anyway!

 

Which bit sounds good? Selling paintings to people who haven't got the money to pay for them? Or the fact that the fella proposing the idea can't add, subtract, multiply or divide?

 

I wonder if he can paint?

[Johanes de Silentio]

Which bit sounds good? Selling paintings to people who haven't got the money to pay for them? Or the fact that the fella proposing the idea can't add, subtract, multiply or divide?

 

I wonder if he can paint?

 

Addressing the problem of the unfair distribution of wealth/resources would be a good idea, imo

[Therapist]

Cyclops is the clown who got us into this mess.

[jambos are go!]

There are increasing murmurings that the coalition

have a plan B to delay cuts and move towards the Brown/darling propoals. Ken Clarke raisingbthe possibilty of a coalition caused double dip recession is evidence of this. It is stupidity to switch off growth prospects with associated tax revenue by pursueing painful cuts.

 

On the main point one can say that the Banks may have the major part of the Blame but Brown contributed. What Brown got right was the solution most of the globe adopted. No way can the Coalition claim resposibility for the recent economic improvements - but they can ruin it.

[Danny Wilde]

There are increasing murmurings that the coalition

have a plan B to delay cuts and move towards the Brown/darling propoals. Ken Clarke raisingbthe possibilty of a coalition caused double dip recession is evidence of this. It is stupidity to switch off growth prospects with associated tax revenue by pursueing painful cuts.

 

On the main point one can say that the Banks may have the major part of the Blame but Brown contributed. What Brown got right was the solution most of the globe adopted. No way can the Coalition claim resposibility for the recent economic improvements - but they can ruin it.

 

What growth prospects though ? Its private sector growth thats needed and urgently. Public sector growth - or holding at current levels - in our present predicament would kill all of us. Where is that private sector growth going to come from ? Industry ? Don't think so, we don't manufacture anything worth a damn and we import almost all of our domestic and lifestyle goods (check out the brand names littering any household). Financial sector ? Likely to be more rationalisation and job losses there. Small business development ? The banks aren't lending enough, concentrating still on rebuilding balance sheets. There are some hopes in renewable energy, green growth, computer gaming. But its all niche stuff and not enough to boost employment generally.

 

As things stand, I don't see where private sector growth - wealth creation - is going to come from. I agree that the onus is on the coalition - as it would be for any government - to take measures to foster growth. But its got to be from the private sector or we're all skrewed. I work in cancer research - so I'm public sector - but unless we can generate wealth in this country, then I'm probably as medium term screwed as any council street sweeper or social worker.

[Danny Wilde]

Most recent official growth picture. Interesting to see what the 3rd quarter will show when it comes out.

 

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

How anyone can credit the eejit that got us into this mess in the first place is beyond belief. 'No more boom and bust' were his words, and he screwed up big time. He should be on the dole, where he has condemned millions of others, until the day he dies, but instead, will take his large pension and his high opinion of himself and enjoy a comfortable existence.

[JamboAl]

There are increasing murmurings that the coalition

have a plan B to delay cuts and move towards the Brown/darling propoals. Ken Clarke raisingbthe possibilty of a coalition caused double dip recession is evidence of this. It is stupidity to switch off growth prospects with associated tax revenue by pursueing painful cuts.

On the main point one can say that the Banks may have the major part of the Blame but Brown contributed. What Brown got right was the solution most of the globe adopted. No way can the Coalition claim resposibility for the recent economic improvements - but they can ruin it.

 

That is exactly what I was alluding to.

They opposed everything GB said and are now trying to disguise that that is the best way to go.

Who is to blame is now behind us. The big Hero was going to sort it out DIFFERENTLY. Where are you Dave?

Cue the University theorists!

 

What a bunch of dishonourable ******s.

[jambos are go!]

What growth prospects though ? Its private sector growth thats needed and urgently. Public sector growth - or holding at current levels - in our present predicament would kill all of us. Where is that private sector growth going to come from ? Industry ? Don't think so, we don't manufacture anything worth a damn and we import almost all of our domestic and lifestyle goods (check out the brand names littering any household). Financial sector ? Likely to be more rationalisation and job losses there. Small business development ? The banks aren't lending enough, concentrating still on rebuilding balance sheets. There are some hopes in renewable energy, green growth, computer gaming. But its all niche stuff and not enough to boost employment generally.

 

As things stand, I don't see where private sector growth - wealth creation - is going to come from. I agree that the onus is on the coalition - as it would be for any government - to take measures to foster growth. But its got to be from the private sector or we're all skrewed. I work in cancer research - so I'm public sector - but unless we can generate wealth in this country, then I'm probably as medium term screwed as any council street sweeper or social worker.

 

A large majority of economists are forecasting growth despite what you say. Growth happens when we bake a bigger cake from which HMG can take more taxes autonmatically. When people spend more and companies produce more. That can be stimulated by many means including government spending. It can also be stimulated by innovation,competive pricing and the like. The current stimulus is to counter weakness in the private sector to give it time to recover and that is happening. Remember a large chunk of public sector spending goes to the private sector in the form of goods and services purchased. Its a mixed economy that admittedly requires the private sector to sell to the rest of the private sector and more importantly citizens.

 

GDP is only a part of the equation. There is enormous wealth out there that dwarfs the deficit and GDP. But people are tightening their belts and we need to get them spending to boost the economy and increase taxes and avoid painful cuts. Thats why the stimulus through borrowing can cost less in the long term. Because growth is fragile but returning to the economy that is why folk are suggesting even within the Coalition that the extra cuts amy not be necessary.

 

Finally, if Britain makes nothing then it strange that it is as someone on said on here recently how come it is the 6th biggest exporter on the planet. We need to make more but we dont make nothing as you suggest.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

The real stimulus in the UK economy was the Bank of England printing funny money to hand to banks to rebuild their balance sheets. The 'fiscal stimulus' Brown kept wittering about was deliberately muted because running a deficit at the top of a boom is nonsensical, but Brown did it and there was no ammo left.

 

Will the coalition do any better? I have my doubts. Brown, however, was deservedly emptied.

 

Cue the Labour fanboys...

[rossthejambo]

 

The real stimulus in the UK economy was the Bank of England printing funny money to hand to banks to rebuild their balance sheets. The 'fiscal stimulus' Brown kept wittering about was deliberately muted because running a deficit at the top of a boom is nonsensical, but Brown did it and there was no ammo left.

 

Will the coalition do any better? I have my doubts. Brown, however, was deservedly emptied.

 

Cue the Labour fanboys...

 

No question about that.

 

I don't think that the coalition have a hope of fixing the problem though, not without alienating the British public in the process.

[billco98]

Of course Gordon Brown was right.

 

I saw the speech made by Helle Thorning-Schmidt, leader of the Danish Social Democratic Party, at the Labour Party Conference last week. She was fulsome in her praise for Gordon Brown. She said that he is sadly missed and sorely needed to deal with the economic catastrophe about to engulf Europe at the hands of the Conservative Right. As Rabbie Burns rightly said.

 

Oh! wad the power the gift tae gie us

Tae see oorsels as ithers see us.

 

Brown was the giant of British politics. He was brought down by the pygmies in his own party as much as by the right wing media lead by the Prince of Evil, Rupert Murdoch.

 

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel prize winning US economist stated in an article in today's Telegraph that Europe's austerity policies are wrong and will prove disastrous.

 

My link

[JamboAl]

 

The real stimulus in the UK economy was the Bank of England printing funny money to hand to banks to rebuild their balance sheets. The 'fiscal stimulus' Brown kept wittering about was deliberately muted because running a deficit at the top of a boom is nonsensical, but Brown did it and there was no ammo left.

 

Will the coalition do any better? I have my doubts. Brown, however, was deservedly emptied.

 

Cue the Labour fanboys...

 

 

You're weakening Geoff.

David is going to display STRONG government - or so he said - which I assume is different to what we had and yet you doubt he will do any better.

That suggests he was full of hot air and bullshit.

I'm getting confused.

http://www.redpepper.org.uk/Countering-the-cuts-myths

[billco98]

How anyone can credit the eejit that got us into this mess in the first place is beyond belief. 'No more boom and bust' were his words, and he screwed up big time. He should be on the dole, where he has condemned millions of others, until the day he dies, but instead, will take his large pension and his high opinion of himself and enjoy a comfortable existence.

 

 

Aye, so Gordon Brown was responsible for what happened in the US, France, Germany, Spain, Greece, Italy,Ireland, Iceland...... et al?

 

Get a grip.

 

The core problem had its roots in the deregulated, laisez faire, neo-liberal financial system put in place by Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Regan thirty years ago. They destroyed Socalism, brought down the Wall, castrated the trade unions, de-industrialised their countries and threw all the eggs in the basket of their respective finacial sectors. Greed, Casino capitalism and criminal irresponsibilty engulfed the system.

 

One thing for certain is that Socialism can't be blamed for the F*****g mess we are now in!

[Danny Wilde]

Of course Gordon Brown was right.

 

I saw the speech made by Helle Thorning-Schmidt, leader of the Danish Social Democratic Party, at the Labour Party Conference last week. She was fulsome in her praise for Gordon Brown. She said that he is sadly missed and sorely needed to deal with the economic catastrophe about to engulf Europe at the hands of the Conservative Right. As Rabbie Burns rightly said.

 

Oh! wad the power the gift tae gie us

Tae see oorsels as ithers see us.

 

Brown was the giant of British politics. He was brought down by the pygmies in his own party as much as by the right wing media lead by the Prince of Evil, Rupert Murdoch.

 

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel prize winning US economist stated in an article in today's Telegraph that Europe's austerity policies are wrong and will prove disastrous.

 

My link

 

Gordon Brown was "right" to construct a massive structural deficit ?

Gordon Brown was "right" to raid pension funds ?

Gordon Brown was "right" to sell off UK gold at the bottom of the market ?

Gordon Brown was "right" to engender the culture of light touch regulation by the toothless FSA ?

Gordon Brown was "right" to waive competition rules and turn 1 bust bank into 2 crippled banks ... by Lloyds swallowing HBOS ?

 

Lets remember something. Fred Goodwin was knighted for "services to banking" in 2004 ... at the peak of Browns love affair with the city. Brown couldn't get enough of banks, bankers and banking.

[Ulysses]

I saw the speech made by Helle Thorning-Schmidt, leader of the Danish Social Democratic Party, at the Labour Party Conference last week. She was fulsome in her praise for Gordon Brown. She said that he is sadly missed and sorely needed to deal with the economic catastrophe about to engulf Europe at the hands of the Conservative Right.

 

 

Aren't the Danish Social Democrats part of the same European Parliament political grouping as the Labour Party, and haven't they lost the last three elections in Denmark, losing seats and votes each time?

 

And isn't the party leader, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, Neil Kinnock's daughter-in-law?

[shaun.lawson]

Aren't the Danish Social Democrats part of the same European Parliament political grouping as the Labour Party, and haven't they lost the last three elections in Denmark, losing seats and votes each time?

 

And isn't the party leader, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, Neil Kinnock's daughter-in-law?

 

 

Try again, billco.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

As usual, the unpalatable truth doesn't sit well with the fanboys as Danny has shown.

 

Billco has already been owned by Uly but one final, general point. He bemoans light touch regulation and yet avoids any kind of linkage to the man responsible for that regulation for a whole decade!

[JamboAl]

As usual, the unpalatable truth doesn't sit well with the fanboys as Danny has shown.

 

Billco has already been owned by Uly but one final, general point. He bemoans light touch regulation and yet avoids any kind of linkage to the man responsible for that regulation for a whole decade!

 

Once more you and your cronies want to deviate from the subject and I can understand why.

Irrespective of who/what caused the recession, was GB right in his short term strategy to fix it and despite Cameron's previous utterances, is he sneaking towards that strategy which he previously denounced?

 

http://www.redpepper...-the-cuts-myths

[Danny Wilde]

Once more you and your cronies want to deviate from the subject and I can understand why.

Irrespective of who/what caused the recession, was GB right in his short term strategy to fix it and despite Cameron's previous utterances, is he sneaking towards that strategy which he previously denounced?

 

http://www.redpepper...-the-cuts-myths

 

JA, I'm not Geoffs crony but watching you try to chase him down has been one of the longest running entertainments in The Shed over the past few months

 

A bit like this.

 

[Ulysses]

Irrespective of who/what caused the recession, was GB right in his short term strategy to fix it and despite Cameron's previous utterances, is he sneaking towards that strategy which he previously denounced?

 

 

Brown was wrong, and the British public will have to pay a bitter price.

 

Your link didn't work, but I managed to find the article anyway. It proposes tax hikes and spending cuts that might possibly - if everything had been calculated right (big if, you don't have a good record in that regard) - cut the deficit by ?60 billion. Even allowing for the high degree of both optimism and assumption built into that estimate, it still leaves the government short of about ?110 to ?120 billion.

 

Now, here's the really important point. If it hadn't been for Gordon Brown, that figure would be substantially lower. In other words, whatever hope of succes the package proposed in your link might have had back in 2007 or 2008, it's a lot less likely to succeed now. And why? Because the Labour government made the deficit position significantly worse.

 

So whatever the current mob do or don't do does not take away from the fact that their predecessors screwed up.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Let's see then Al. Let's ignore the banks for a minute. Mortgage guarantee - no one signed up for it

Stamp duty change - little to no impact

VAT cut - slight impact but quickly reversed as it wasn't affordable.

 

The banks? If you are bailing them out they chose the correct method. However, the bailout has turned them into zombies and they will hold the economy back further.

[shaun.lawson]

Brown was wrong, and the British public will have to pay a bitter price.

 

Your link didn't work, but I managed to find the article anyway. It proposes tax hikes and spending cuts that might possibly - if everything had been calculated right (big if, you don't have a good record in that regard) - cut the deficit by ?60 billion. Even allowing for the high degree of both optimism and assumption built into that estimate, it still leaves the government short of about ?110 to ?120 billion.

 

Now, here's the really important point. If it hadn't been for Gordon Brown, that figure would be substantially lower. In other words, whatever hope of succes the package proposed in your link might have had back in 2007 or 2008, it's a lot less likely to succeed now. And why? Because the Labour government made the deficit position significantly worse.

 

So whatever the current mob do or don't do does not take away from the fact that their predecessors screwed up.

 

 

This is precisely what bewildered me about Ross' post from earlier in the thread:

 

I think you could be right, he was honest about the recession and what it would take to get out of it.

 

Cameron and co said what the public wanted to hear in order to get into office. No doubt about that. And ever since they've been firing shots at Labour for months about the state of the economy and, whilst the Labour party aren't blameless, I'm still to hear what the ConLib coalition have actually done to sort this mess out apart from speculating huge cuts across the public sector. Have they actually done anything to cut the deficit yet?

 

I get the impression they're still blaming Labour to cover up their arses because they know what's going to come is going to be devastating to the majority of the British public.

 

Do Ross and Al think the structural deficit happened as if by magic? And how on earth does Ross somehow separate huge cuts across the public sector from cutting the deficit? Why does he think the cuts are happening in the first place? For fun or something?

 

It's as though people think a new government comes in, and suddenly it's Year Zero. But it isn't at all: that new government has to deal with whatever it inherits. In the case of this government, what it's inherited is bloody awful; and as an aside, in the case of the last government, what they inherited was very good. But the last government managed to stuff it up anyway.

[shaun.lawson]

JA, I'm not Geoffs crony but watching you try to chase him down has been one of the longest running entertainments in The Shed over the past few months

 

A bit like this.

 

 

 

And when he isn't chasing Geoff, he's chasing JamboRobbo; and when he isn't chasing JamboRobbo, he's chasing kitster; and when he isn't chasing kitster, he's chasing me. But try as he might, he'll never catch any of us.

[Danny Wilde]

 

And when he isn't chasing Geoff, he's chasing JamboRobbo; and when he isn't chasing JamboRobbo, he's chasing kitster; and when he isn't chasing kitster, he's chasing me. But try as he might, he'll never catch any of us.

 

 

Beep beep !

[Mac_fae_Gillie]

annoucing huge cuts giving over inflated numbers involved then only actually doing 2/3rds of the cuts is politics...

Was Gordon Brown right...the last 2 quarterlys suggest the UK is doing better than predicted so by that standard yes.

Banks are making more money and can repay higher % of the loans and bigger profits from government shares in banks are expected.

Still a huge debt but things are looking brighter and far better than many other nations,considering how big the banking industry is in the UK compared to france/spain/italy he did well.

[Johanes de Silentio]

A few economics students on kickback, then!

 

Sorry, but if you think the economy can be controlled, then you're wrong, imo.

[JamboAl]

 

And when he isn't chasing Geoff, he's chasing JamboRobbo; and when he isn't chasing JamboRobbo, he's chasing kitster; and when he isn't chasing kitster, he's chasing me. But try as he might, he'll never catch any of us.

 

 

I love myself, who do you love? You couldn't even catch Stan Boardman!

Once more you attack the person and not the subject.

Remember I started the thread and I asked a question about the future.

When people like you make nonsensical assertions/assumptions, you must expect to be challenged. The more of these you make, the more it will seem you are being chased. People are allowed to hold different views from you and no there is no legal requirement to accept what you say as gospel.

As I said, I started by asking a question concerning Cameron's forthcoming tactics and possible backtracking, nothing to do with how/why structural deficits arose. If you do not wish to contribute to that question then you don't need to. If you want to discuss the past I suggest you start another thread.

[JamboAl]

A few economics students on kickback, then!

 

Sorry, but if you think the economy can be controlled, then you're wrong, imo.

 

It certainly will not be controlled in the short term so any action being discussed will be what is best for improvement and stability.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

A few economics students on kickback, then!

 

Sorry, but if you think the economy can be controlled, then you're wrong, imo.

 

 

Quite, as the Austrian school rightly say.

 

Meanwhile, who was it that claimed to have ended boom and bust?

[Boris]

 

Meanwhile, who was it that claimed to have ended boom and bust?

 

Mary Whitehouse?

 

 

[JamboAl]

Quite, as the Austrian school rightly say.

 

Meanwhile, who was it that claimed to have ended boom and bust?

 

I don't think it was Norman Lamont.

Ken Clarke?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I don't think it was Norman Lamont.

Ken Clarke?

 

 

Here's a clue

 

[rossthejambo]

 

This is precisely what bewildered me about Ross' post from earlier in the thread:

 

 

 

Do Ross and Al think the structural deficit happened as if by magic? And how on earth does Ross somehow separate huge cuts across the public sector from cutting the deficit? Why does he think the cuts are happening in the first place? For fun or something?

 

It's as though people think a new government comes in, and suddenly it's Year Zero. But it isn't at all: that new government has to deal with whatever it inherits. In the case of this government, what it's inherited is bloody awful; and as an aside, in the case of the last government, what they inherited was very good. But the last government managed to stuff it up anyway.

 

I take it you missed my response to Geoff when he said that Brown was deservedly emptied.

 

No question about that.

 

I don't think that the coalition have a hope of fixing the problem though, not without alienating the British public in the process.

 

I've never once said that Brown was blameless, it was absolutely his fault that we're in this mess, never disputed it.

 

All I've been saying is it will take a lot more than what Cameron & Co are proposing to solve the problem and in doing so they will no doubt lose support from the public, but that would have happened regardless of who won the election. I said so at the time.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

I've never once said that Brown was blameless, it was absolutely his fault that we're in this mess, never disputed it.

 

All I've been saying is it will take a lot more than what Cameron & Co are proposing to solve the problem and in doing so they will no doubt lose support from the public, but that would have happened regardless of who won the election. I said so at the time.

 

Agreed.

[doctor jambo]

Brown was totally at fault for not sowing money away for a rainy day. During the "bubble" when money was being raised in record amounts- he out spent even that, adn record revenues for HMRC STILL fell short of his profilgate spending.

there can be no disguising that farce

[Johanes de Silentio]

Quite, as the Austrian school rightly say.

 

Meanwhile, who was it that claimed to have ended boom and bust?

 

 

Brown was wrong about a lot of things, and made mistakes, but to blame him alone for the economic mess is a bit unfair, imo - this mess was a long time coming - longer than Brown's period - have a look at Kondratiev's 'Long Wave' cycles theory - possibly a lot of pish, but interesting, imo.

 

[jambos are go!]

Brown was totally at fault for not sowing money away for a rainy day. During the "bubble" when money was being raised in record amounts- he out spent even that, adn record revenues for HMRC STILL fell short of his profilgate spending.

there can be no disguising that farce

Tell that to the folk who are living better lifes or are indeed still alive thanks to the money Brown poured into the NHS. Tell it to those who no longer have to endure enormous waiting lists to get treatment. Tell it to the kids throughout the land who are no longer being taught in decrepit crumbling Schools. Tell it to those old folk who no longer have to turn the heating down in winter. Tell it to kids given a better start through Surestart. Tell it like it is - but may not be for long now that we are run by politicians who , as they say, know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

[Boris]

Tell that to the folk who are living better lifes or are indeed still alive thanks to the money Brown poured into the NHS. Tell it to those who no longer have to endure enormous waiting lists to get treatment. Tell it to the kids throughout the land who are no longer being taught in decrepit crumbling Schools. Tell it to those old folk who no longer have to turn the heating down in winter. Tell it to kids given a better start through Surestart. Tell it like it is - but may not be for long now that we are run by politicians who , as they say, know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

 

Hear, hear!

 

How people react to the decimation of public services will be interesting to see. Trouble is that in this country income tax is still a taboo subject. Until this is addressed, then the public purse will suffer and as such so will public services.

 

It seems to me that the British electorate want good public services but aren't prepared to pay for them. Square that and your on a winner!

[Chester™]

Tell that to the folk who are living better lifes or are indeed still alive thanks to the money Brown poured into the NHS. Tell it to those who no longer have to endure enormous waiting lists to get treatment. Tell it to the kids throughout the land who are no longer being taught in decrepit crumbling Schools. Tell it to those old folk who no longer have to turn the heating down in winter. Tell it to kids given a better start through Surestart. Tell it like it is - but may not be for long now that we are run by politicians who , as they say, know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

 

All of those examples can be argued against. While investment may have gone 'up' in the NHS, most independent studies have the quality of the NHS going down. Waiting lists, while going down, again doesnt mean the quality has went up. As I said previously record investment does NOT translate to care. At the frontline its still understaffed and overworked, while middle management and other tiers of bureaucracy still consume more than it should. It should also be noted that there are many trains of thought which say NHS spending will ALWAYS rise because of the rising costs of medication, equipment and staffing (its still the largest single employer in Europe is it not?)

 

Schools are still crumbling.

 

Old folk still have to turn down the heating, as the Winter Fuel Allowance doesnt cover it all (and why did he allow it to go to those who can afford it?)

 

Surestart? Where do we start with that? Pretty much proven that those it targeted have not benefited from it.

 

And dont get me started just how all this apparent great spending, has affected children in this country. The UK is still pretty much bottom of every statistical category of health and wellbeing in the developed world (and I see it all the time in my line of work).

 

And before anyone asks, im anything but a supporter of the manky mob(s) currently in power. But to say Brown was some great leader and we should praise him for the spending really bugs me. Its what you do with it, not how much you spend.

[Therapist]

Brown was wrong about a lot of things, and made mistakes, but to blame him alone for the economic mess is a bit unfair, imo

 

Cyclops let the economy get out of control on his watch at the Treasury. He then proved to be a liability as PM.

 

Fortunately Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne are tackling the problems they inherited head on and are making a fine job of restoring our economic health. If only Cyclops could have been as creative instead of his petty targeting of higher rate tax payers to appease his union paymasters and deflect attention from his many failings.

[Mister Dee]

I don't pretend to know a great deal about politics but I do know a lot about the NHS, & I'm telling you that the tories will do everything they can to send the NHS into a position where it will have to be privatised.

 

Some of the cutbacks mooted are ridiculous.