FAO Labour voters on here

Labours ideal is spend spend spend (run out of money) borrow... spend....dam "there is no money left" ....let someone else get the bad headlines sorting it out (ie Tories)....and when the Tories are kicked out having sorted out the Labour mess, people's short memories go and vote in Labour....who then rinse, repeat do the same again....(and then we are not seen as the nasty party...the ones sorting out our mess are)!

Even worse than that corbin is a bloody communist!

Ducking now!

 

Hope you get a full keep net with this one.

 

How much's the national debt gone up by again? 700,000,000 in 7 years . Go on add up all the Labour government debt collective and see how much it is.

 

according to jabba the huts maths, its only 7p each over 3 years, plus a day out newting and a blown blackies egg

 

Seems Fatalbert and Plobby have gone quiet.

 

Economic history does not agree with you but I guess lying is De rigeour with tories these days.

And Corbyn is much less left wing than founder of tbe NHS Nye Bevin

 

I'd also like to know how you justify May being too spineless to appear in a debate and a totally and utterly uncosted manifesto? If labour did either of those things they'd be strung up. In fact they were for not remembering publically available figures off the top of their heads, much easier to not forget figures when you won't debate and don't have any figures anyway.

 

Well, if you were factually correct on any of those statements perhaps you might be more believable.

FACT: Post-war Labour governments have reduced the national debt in more years (7 / 28 or 25%) than Tory governments (4 / 42 or ~10%) despite being in power 14 years less.
FACT: National Debt has increased by 2.5x since 2010, by an amount larger than all previous Labour governments combined.
FACT: Despite austerity, the Tory government has failed to hit the targets for reducing the deficit, and has put it back now to 2025. So another 10 years of austerity.
FACT. Despite manifesto pledges to reduce immigration below 100,000, while May was Home Secretary immigration increased to the highest ever levels.

 

Do we have to have this conversation again for the hard of thinking?.

When the Tories came to power we had, approximate figures, a national debt of around 900 billion, built up over 500 years, but at that point they inherited a situation where we were losing a further 150 billion a year. i.e. they inherited a situation where we were adding around 1/6 to the total national debt that had taken 500 years to build to that point. Of course the national debt is going to go up more in their years in power than it ever has before - it is frankly ridiculous to expect anything else, and it is a ******* stupid argument to make as an assertion to cast on the tories. I am sick of hearing this argument put forward as a case to bash the tories with because it shows a complete lack of economic understanding on behalf of the person making the case.

I'll tell you what, if it hadn't been the case, because they wiped of an annual deficit of 150 billion within a year, you would have been bloody complaining about austerity. good and proper. They would have basically had to turn the public spending tap off altogether.

 

How many years have to pass and how manically does it need to rise before you can't blame labour?

 

You can blame the tories all you want for the speed at which the deficit has come down and whether a different approach or policies would have made any difference. No problem with that.

But the suggestion that it it the tories fault that the national debt has gone up on their watch more than at any time in history is nonsense. Even if they had wiped out the deficit in 3 years, so for the sake of argument it was 150b in year 1, 80b in year 2 and 30b in year 3, before coming back into balance in year 4, and my god how painful would that have been, that would still have been 260b in 3 years, which would still have represented adding about a third to the national debt in 3 years.

Anyone who can't see that it is a fatuous argument is a bloody idiot.

 

Another myth to bust.

Historically you're wrong. Conservative governments spend more than Labour ones.

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

 

Insults and lack of ability to accept the tories have ever done anything wrong makes it impossible to have a civilised debate. I did not support or vote for labour prior to Corbyn and think lots of what they did was wrong but to continually ignore all facts other than your boring condescension in the thread is exhausting.

 

You are right and thankfully the majority of people understand you have to live within your means and that it is about prioritising the spend on what is a greater challenge. Unfortunately Labour's record of uncontrolled expenditure has not led to improved public services and I'm sorry but privatisation of the railways is not serving the 'many'. Social justice is also at both ends of the scale and as much as we need to address the tax avoiders we don't want to return to 'benefits Britain' and a situation which encouraged people not to seek work. It's no good having a wish list that appeals to the sensitivities and emotions of people when there is clearly an absence of a plan of how to achieve it. I agree with some of the policies like free tuition fees (although Labour introduced them) but Labour can't be trusted to manage the economy and their spending plans will ironically affect their core supporters the most

 

There are no figures in the Tory manifesto. At all. I take it this sort of ire doesn't extend to the party you support? As the graph above shows we are the only country with economic growth and fall in wages, THAT is a party hurting labour's "core supporters"


Ps I am aware there are plenty of people like you and the tories will win by a landslide but I just think that's an incredibly sad reflection of the selfish nature of the modern Briton.

"People are not good to each other one on one"

 

I blame Henry the 8th for building Nonsuch.

 

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnn

 

Just a quick query on economic competence. OBR estimates about 6 billion quid a year to pay for the conservative manifesto pledge to reduce immigration. Where are the costings for this or indeed any other pledges?

To believe that Labour mismanaged the economy and the tories manage it correctly just shows the job the right wing press does on people. Look at the figures Scoff posted.


You are right about one thing privatisation helps no one and of course the tories will privatise the NHS.

 

I think this is where Labour utterly failed under Miliband. They simply accepted the tory suggestion they'd wracked up debt and not the reason for wracking up debt.

The huge bank bailout followed by a Keynesian approach to economic stimulation under Brown was a brave and much needed stimulus at the time. God knows how painful that period could've been otherwise.

The problem started in 2010 when immediately capital projects were pulled. The worst thing you can do after an economic stimulus (which worked when you look at the GDP figures at the time) is to pull it. You get spend without return. And as such we have what we have. Nominal growth that doesn't filter to returns and is drained.

However....

I have a big worry (and I don't know what the answer is, merely talking aloud) though about Labour economic policy.

If we're out of customs union and single market, especially if we default to WTO, the UK is an unattractive place to invest without huge sweeteners. Unless the pound gets super cheap to offset inflation of tariffs, we're going to have a pretty painful recession and a lot of job losses. if that's combined with a sizeable lift in corporation and other business taxes, we're going to lose even more businesses to the continent.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of this ideological austerity, because its not working.

as I say, I don't know what the best way forward is, because however you look at it, i'm pretty sure we're totally screwed by being out of the single market for at least a decade.