lambsy_uk wrote: There's no dining out on 'Ifs Buts and Maybes'; the fact is Labour won 3 elections in a row and were firmly in office during some of the nation's darkest times!
Yes, “old Labour” had to modernise to become electable.. However, the crux of the problem here is some of the right-wing economic policies they used to “modernise” (PFI, lax banking regs) are the ones which have subsequently bitten them on the rse. And some of the Tory attempts to "modernise" (e.g. Gay Marriage) has seen the bigots flee to ukip.
lambsy_uk wrote: "The curent government are now in the difficult position of having to sort out the mess created my the previous government."
There’s actually a drinking game on Twitter whenever a Tory MP trots that one out on Question Time – (4 fingers if the audience groan). As I pointed out earlier, the mess would have been even smellier had the Tories been elected. If the Tories had actually opposed light touch banking regulation, PFI, etc then they might have a bit more credibility. Instead, some of the Laissez-faire “mess” created by Labour is being further smeared around by the Tories, all disguised by sections of the press scapegoating folks on the bottom rungs of society, rather than those at the top. Even the Torygraph have clocked this at times:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11109845/Why-arent-the-British-middle-classes-staging-a-... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100100708/the-moral-decay-of-our-society-is-as-bad-at-...
The right-leaning tabs can say “job done” in terms of keeping a large section very influential grey vote away from Labour, however in doing so, they’ve unleashed a ukip monster that they can’t put back in the box until those very voters are in boxes of their own in 10-15 years time. The irony of this is many businesses are getting twitchy at the prospect of economic issues such as EU membership being used as a political football between the Tories – the traditional party of business – and ukip – a party of “fruitcakes, nutters, and [not so] closet racists.”
lambsy_uk wrote: This is making them rather unpopular
I disagree. In fact I’d go as far to say it’s proving popular with the type of voter Cameron wants to claw back from UKIP – i.e. older people whose reality is shaped by what they read in the Daily Afraid. – after all issues such as wages, job stability, childcare, housing costs are “not the problem” of people who have retired, gained inheritance, and no longer pay a mortgage.
9 people Kudoed post 5 - which is factually a load of clichéd rubbish. Imo it’s a dangerous road to be going down when populist policies are made ad-hoc on the wave of tabloid headlines, and scapegoating the wrong people for structural economic problems. As mentioned in the article on the ignorati thread, cutting aspects mentioned in the OP barely touches the sides in reducing the deficit, yet makes life considerably more uncomfortable to those who are economically vulnerable. The tabs and ignorati say Labour created a culture of “welfare dependency”, where single teenage mothers are popping out sprogs left, right and centre, yet the fertility rate for teenagers between 1997 and 2010 actually declined considerably. But hey, let’s not let the truth get in the way of tabloid myths that let “the establishment” off the hook, and divert attention to those who don’t really make that much structural difference in the big scheme of things.
lambsy_uk wrote: but at least they have the scruples to sort it out rather than run and hide and hope it all goes away!!! Times are indeed tough for many, not just the poorest, unemployed and low paid either, but the deficit has been reduced by a third, we have the strongest economy in the modern Western World, employment is up and unemployment down and cuts are being made in wasted resources. All this in one term in office compared to the failure of the previous 3 terms!!!
.
That’s squeezing the toffee sauce to the point of making a queefing sound. If it’s all so fine and dandy, why have the Tories hemorrhaged support to ukip, and why are Labour ahead in the polls despite being led by someone whose widely portrayed as, and viewed as useful as a chocolate teapot?
Maybe some people are starting to clock the cronyism and propaganda that links big business, the Tories and the “establishment” media? But then again, you can’t teach old dogs new tricks in spotting when a spin cycle is at full speed ahead:
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/517428491370102784/photo/1
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/By5CNxcCQAA6SKg.jpg:large
evo_wrote: I think it's amazing how the good old Brits keep that good old reserved, stiff upper lip character going; when one half hate the other half with a real passion
I don’t “hate” people who vote Conservative. To trot out a oft-used cliché “some of my friends are Conservatives”. I “get” why they vote(d) conservative, in that they run reasonable sized businesses, have highish incomes, thus it’s in their interest to vote for a party that makes their life easier. Funnily enough, it’s from these chaps that I picked up the vibe that they’re worried the Tories are acting “too much like UKIP”, and are possibly looking at Labour and the Lib Dems as alternatives. That would have been unthinkable for them in the past.
My *headdesk* moments arrive when people who are obviously not that well off decide to regurgitate headlines from the “establishment” media wrongly blaming people who are not particularly in a good position to defend themselves. Ask yourself, who really deserves the pitchforks and the rotten fruit? Immigrants? The cast of Benefits Street?...Or the faceless people behind the Phones4U collapse?
“Phones4U was bought by the private equity house, BC Partners, in 2011 for £200m. BC then borrowed £205m and, having saddled the company with vast amounts of debt, paid themselves a dividend of £223m. Crippled by debt, the company has now collapsed into administration. The people who crippled it have walked away with nearly £20m million, while 5,600 people face losing their jobs. The taxman may also be stiffed on £90m in unpaid VAT and PAYE. It’s like a version of 1987’s Wall Street on steroids, the difference being that Gordon Gecko wins at the end and everyone shrugs and says, “Well, it’s not ideal, but really we need guys like him.”
