[Archived] Election

[broadsword]

Gillian Duffy has taken Lord beaverbrook's shilling and hammers Gordon Brown some more in tomorrow's Mail on Sunday! Classic!

Good for her I say. Only other headlines tonight about Mr Broon is that he got heckled in the North East.

He'll be glad to go I reckon.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7665249/General-Election-2010-Labour-are-getting-easy-ride-says-PM-heckler.html

[jim mk2]

The newspaper industry keeping up with technology is probably something with enough meat for a separate thread, but after seeing an interview with David Simon (creator of The Wire and former journo at the Baltimore Sun) I do see how the free, fast and blipvert/blog approach to the news reporting that the internet brought about has resulted in a huge decline in investigative journalism, and that is no good thing.

Oh and I'm no longer unemployed, after realising I wasn't going to jump back into either a techie or middle management job in the current climate, I got off my arse and started my own IT company, which is coming along nicely (and even has a few board members as customers http://www.pegden.com if you're interested).

Didn't know you were unemployed and pleased your new enterprise is going well. If you are / become an employer, I hope you pay your employees a decent living wage.

Newspapers have adapted and survived the threat of the wireless and television over the years and will reinvent themselves again in the age of the internet. People will always pay for good quality journalism. I retired many moons ago but still buy a paper every day and am constantly staggered by the quality and quantity of information and good writing available for a £1 or less. Fantastic value for money and so much more satisfying to read than on a computer screen. Hopefully the FT and News Corp decisions to charge for online content will become the industry norm.

Unfortunately, local and regional newspapers are having a very hard time at present owing to the advertising downturn in the recession and competition from the internet. They have traditionally been the training grounds for journalists and their long-term decline is a worry for the industry. The demise of local papers is a blow for democracy too as they have traditionally had important roles as whistleblowers on local councils and local politics. For a few pence everyone should buy their local paper if they can - they have vital roles to play in the community.

[jim mk2]

Gillian Duffy has taken Lord beaverbrook's shilling and hammers Gordon Brown some more in tomorrow's Mail on Sunday! Classic!

Lord Beaverbrook was the owner of the Express so I'd be very surprised if he owned the MoS too, particularly as the MoS started 16 years after he died. I think you mean Lord Rothermere.

Cameron heckled by the father of a disabled son.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/david-cameron/7638877/David-Cameron-heckled-by-father-of-disabled-son.html

[Wiggy]

Do the French have the stress levels that we tend to have, do they have the same sort of debt levels we have. Pushing house prices up here yoda only adds to debt, pushing prices across the board up leaving many people eventually unable to buy a property just like the French.

We use pretend money whilst the French use real money Yoda

Quite.

In the BBC debate Gordon Brown showed an extraordinary misunderstanding of economics and markets when there was a question about the housing market. He said it had been very important to keep interest rates low to allow people to get on the housing ladder. He took housing out of the Bank of England's inflation calculations making interest rates artificially low and pushing house prices to unsustainable levels. This was a policy developed by Brown's economic mentor, Alan Greenspan in the US. Greenspan has since said he was wrong and apologised. This policy was one of the main reasons there was a credit crunch.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the ex Iron Chancellor's mea culpa!

[tcj_jones]

For those who understand the electoral system and the significance of opinion polls a little better than myself, what is looking the most likely outcome at the moment and, if there were to be a hung parliament, who would be able to throw their weight around the most?

Also, I missed the last TV debate, who came out on top?

As good as these TV debates have been in getting people interested in politics again, I reckon they might overall be having a detrimental effect as it's becoming more about image that substance. For instance, in the second debate, I thought Brown was extremely impressive, yet he came out in 'last place'. With these debates, his campaign seems to have nose-dived. Clegg, on the other hand, has shot up in popularity despite, IMO, having a seriously weak manifesto. Cameron as well seems to have an edge on Brown, even with the negative stigma that still comes with the Tory party since Thatcher.

With Lib Dem votes seeming to come mostly from former Labour voters, I'm worried about the Tories getting back into power. Does that look a likely outcome right now?

[yoda]

Do the French have the stress levels that we tend to have, do they have the same sort of debt levels we have. Pushing house prices up here yoda only adds to debt, pushing prices across the board up leaving many people eventually unable to buy a property just like the French.

We use pretend money whilst the French use real money Yoda

Not many French have got any money, stress levels in my area are the highest in Europe with the highest suicide rate. You missed the point, they don't buy houses like in Britain to create wealth, they are better supported by the state if they rent. I wasn't suggesting that house prices should rise, just pointing out that equity cannot be used in France like in the UK. You own your own house why? what good is it to you if you at some point you cannot use the equity or use the house as security.

[John]

Chatting to some people in the Armed Forces yesterday.

Oh my god, the sheer hatred of Gordon Brown was astounding.........he really has been a complete disaster.

[jim mk2]

This policy was one of the main reasons there was a credit crunch.

The economic crisis started in the US subprime market in which lending institutions such as Fannae Mae and Freddie Mac inflated a housing market bubble by lending to people who were unable to repay their loans when interest rates started to rise. The subsequent recession and "credit crunch" were a consequence of poor regulation of banks and other institutions. There has been a worldwide property meltdown since the peak of 2006 but the fact British interest rates have stayed low have helped UK house prices to recover to pre-crash levels in most regions and the overall economy to gradually recover from the recession. Your assertion that the government made ........"interest rates artificially low and pushing house prices to unsustainable levels... and was one of the main reasons there was a credit crunch".... is incorrect.

[John]

Thanks goodness we did not follow Nick Clegg's wish and join the Euro - we would be in the same state as the PIGS.

Then again, such is the desperate state of our finances, we may still follow that path...(I don't mean joining the Euro, but am referring to the level of debt we are in)

The Lib Dems are a strange bunch summed up by Clegg's nervousness last Thursday - Mr Smooth had a bead of sweat and under scrutiny its fairly obvious why his party has not been treated seriously for many years.

[thenodrog]

Then again, such is the desperate state of our finances, we may still follow that path...(I don't mean joining the Euro, but am referring to the level of debt we are in)

Shouldn't we avoid all that pallaver and just attack some backward country and loot it and exploit it's citizens like we used to do in the good old days?

Problem is Browns legacy means we'd have to take over an entire continent just to square the books now.

[John]

Quite funny, Cameron on a hung parliment.

"Well, they will end up with a Cleggified Balls, or a Ballsified Clegg. That is the problem we are looking at," he said.

Mr Cameron again reiterated his attack on the Liberal democrat leader, who was the focus of much of many of Mr Cameron's attacks during the final TV debate, and who continues to present the most problems to the Tory leader.

"I thought he overplayed his hand on expenses," he said.

"Anyone would think it was a cross between the Archangel Gabriel and Mother Teresa we were dealing with.

[Wiggy]

Your assertion that the government made ........"interest rates artificially low and pushing house prices to unsustainable levels... and was one of the main reasons there was a credit crunch".... is incorrect.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

I actually wrote...

This was a policy developed by Brown's economic mentor, Alan Greenspan in the US. Greenspan has since said he was wrong and apologised. This policy was one of the main reasons there was a credit crunch.

Greenspan developed the policy of low interest rates in order to fuel the housing market, he said, it gave the economy "a feel good factor". One of Greenspan's most avid followers was Gordon Brown, who met Greenspan many times on his trips to New England. All of this is chronicled in Alan Greenspan's autobiography, The Age of Turbulence.

Subsequently housing costs were not included in the Bank of England's inflation measure resulting in an overheated market here and record levels of personal debt.

I just get the feeling that if a Tory government had developed this policy you would be attacking it!

Gordon Brown's period as Chancellor has been a disaster.When he was in opposition he stated that " a weak currency is a sign of a weak government". Well sterling has lost 25% of it's value since Lehman Brothers, so the rest of the world hasn't got much confidence in UK plc, has it?

[FourLaneBlue]

The Guardian (the only print media I still read, and then only online) has switched it's support to Lib Dem after decades of supporting Labour.

Interesting.

However, personally I'm not sure that newspapers should be allowed to come out and support a political party.

[jim mk2]

I just get the feeling that if a Tory government had developed this policy you would be attacking it!

The Tory government from 1979 - 97 presided over two housing market boom and busts after it removed the restrictions on borrowing of multiples of salary. Before 1979 there were strict rules over how much individuals and couples could borrow but they were swept away so that some people in the boom of 2000- 2006 were borrowing as much as 5 x joint salaries. Labour should have reinstated those restrictions but the housing boom that ended in 2006 was a direct result of the Tory borrowing reforms. Brown's period of chancellor coincided with one of the longest periods of low inflation economic growth in this country's history.

Interesting.

However, personally I'm not sure that newspapers should be allowed to come out and support a political party.

Newspapers for better or worse have always reflected the political views of their proprietors. That some newspapers owners change their views according to the mood of the country says it all about their lack of political convictions.

[RibbleValleyRover]

For those who understand the electoral system and the significance of opinion polls a little better than myself, what is looking the most likely outcome at the moment and, if there were to be a hung parliament, who would be able to throw their weight around the most?

I'm no expert but its looking like a Hung parliament is the likely outcome if you go off UNS. The Conservatives received a boost in the Sunday polls, a couple showing they almost had a majority. If they can get another boost before Thursday they have a chance of a minority or majority government. In the hung parliament situation i don't think Clegg will prop up a Labour government, especially if Labour come third in terms of the number of votes cast and the percentage. The likely cost of a Lab/Lib Dem alliance would be Brown's head, I’m not sure though that would go down well with the public having what is essentially another unelected prime minister with no mandate. It would also blow Clegg’s change argument completely out of the water.

Also, I missed the last TV debate, who came out on top?

All the polls after show that Cameron had won the third and final debate. I think they were correct.

As good as these TV debates have been in getting people interested in politics again, I reckon they might overall be having a detrimental effect as it's becoming more about image that substance. For instance, in the second debate, I thought Brown was extremely impressive, yet he came out in 'last place'. With these debates, his campaign seems to have nose-dived. Clegg, on the other hand, has shot up in popularity despite, IMO, having a seriously weak manifesto. Cameron as well seems to have an edge on Brown, even with the negative stigma that still comes with the Tory party

since Thatcher.

I'm not too sure about these debates either, seems to have turned it into an X-Factor style contest. Clegg benefited most from these debates and yet at times he wasn't tested at all on them. I've seen on other programs Clegg or Cable being grilled and they have fallen apart under the scrutiny.

With Lib Dem votes seeming to come mostly from former Labour voters, I'm worried about the Tories getting back into power. Does that look a likely outcome right now?

If one party is going to get an overall majority at this election it’s going to be the Conservatives. Most of the Lib Dem support has come from Labour or from undecided’s. Recent polling has shown that the Lib Dem vote is softer than the Conservatives and Labour, not surprising considering the boost they got was from a lot of floating voters.

[John]

I've seen on other programs Clegg or Cable being grilled and they have fallen apart under the scrutiny.

Agree - Cable on the chancellors debate was awful, shaking and completely contradicting himself.

Clegg on the last leaders debate looked visibly nervous and struggled. He comes across as the greatest saint of all time but in reality the Lib Dem policies are slightly strange and not with the popular vote IMO.

[thenodrog]

Newspapers for better or worse have always reflected the political views of their proprietors. That some newspapers owners change their views according to the mood of the country says it all about their lack of political convictions.

No it doesn't. It just validates their reasoning and perception. To blindly support a poor government that has performed abysmally simply through 'political convictions' signifies either a sterile intellect or a flock mentality.

[thenodrog]

Agree - Cable on the chancellors debate was awful, shaking and completely contradicting himself.

Clegg on the last leaders debate looked visibly nervous and struggled. He comes across as the greatest saint of all time but in reality the Lib Dem policies are slightly strange and not with the popular vote IMO.

As I said last week the Libs say and do what they want cos thought they'd never get into power. The thought of them actually making real decisions would see them run a mile. Being a LibDem MP is a bobby's job. It's the next best political position to being a MEP.

[broadsword]

Can you imagine being an MEP?

Cripes, what an absolute gravy train.

[thenodrog]

The Tory government from 1979 - 97 presided over two housing market boom and busts after it removed the restrictions on borrowing of multiples of salary. Before 1979 there were strict rules over how much individuals and couples could borrow but they were swept away so that some people in the boom of 2000- 2006 were borrowing as much as 5 x joint salaries. Labour should have reinstated those restrictions but the housing boom that ended in 2006 was a direct result of the Tory borrowing reforms.

You've glossed over that failing. A full 9 years in power in your example between 1997 and 2006 and yet they do sweet FA except still blame Margaret Thatcher's govt from 20 years previous!!! Rightly or wrongly by that time she'd done all that but had only been in power 8 years! There are talkers and ther are doers.

Blair would never make tough and unpopular decisions hence the nickname Teflon Tony. Unfortunately that tactic is nothing more than a cop out of the highest magnitude and a sure sign of a leader and a party that put themselves and their interests before the country.

If Labour don't do what they promise or what you think they should have done then whats the point of voting them in again? Just to back this up I can remember the Labour opposition in complete disarray and squeaking about re-nationalising all the industries that the Thatcher govt de-nationalised in the early 80's as soon as they got in power again. I'm sure that you remember that to Jim. So exactly what happened to that particular promise?

[JAL]

Not many French have got any money, stress levels in my area are the highest in Europe with the highest suicide rate. You missed the point, they don't buy houses like in Britain to create wealth, they are better supported by the state if they rent. I wasn't suggesting that house prices should rise, just pointing out that equity cannot be used in France like in the UK. You own your own house why? what good is it to you if you at some point you cannot use the equity or use the house as security.

Buying a house to create wealth yoda, is ALL wrong in my opinion. Creating wealth should be about making things that you can sell to the world, not buying a house - what a joke ideal it is that a house should be a wealth creator, O how limited are we FFS.

There was a young local girl 21 years old with 10 GCSE's A-C and three A levels who committed suicide because she couldnt find work around here - so very sad. Theres also a recent tale that a job in the laundry department at Blackburn Royal attracted almost 5000 applicants, dont think unemployment and suicide is unique to France alone.

Understand your point yoda, whose right, whose wrong for me the UK housing market farce simply cannot continue and should be controlled so that people dont have to go to the @#/? banks for money to have a future were they owe more money for a lot, lot longer than say our generation - its simply not right!

[tony gale's mic]

You've glossed over that failing. A full 9 years in power in your example between 1997 and 2006 and yet they do sweet FA except still blame Margaret Thatcher's govt from 20 years previous!!! Rightly or wrongly by that time she'd done all that but had only been in power 8 years! There are talkers and ther are doers.

Blair would never make tough and unpopular decisions hence the nickname Teflon Tony. Unfortunately that tactic is nothing more than a cop out of the highest magnitude and a sure sign of a leader and a party that put themselves and their interests before the country.

If Labour don't do what they promise or what you think they should have done then whats the point of voting them in again? Just to back this up I can remember the Labour opposition in complete disarray and squeaking about re-nationalising all the industries that the Thatcher govt de-nationalised in the early 80's as soon as they got in power again. I'm sure that you remember that to Jim. So exactly what happened to that particular promise?

I think his point was the error that Labour made in allowing fewer restrictions was one that the Tories have done and would do again.

[tony gale's mic]

I see this bandied about, but I don't believe it to be true. Hospitals are forbidden to turn away the very sick, even without insurance, which is one of the reason that their budgets are under tremendous pressure.

It also fails to account for the many medical professionals who treat people (such as my uncle), and gives them samples, etc. when they don't have insurance to pay for the medication.

Looking at the statistics, I doubt that your picture of the American health system is accurate.

Hospitals are forbidden to turn away the very sick and have to give them emergency treatment, however this is very limited in its scope.

To give a couple of examples, if you had a heart attack in the USA then they would be duty bound to admit you and if you had a cardiac arrest to defibrillate you, give you morphine, oxygen, nitrates to decrease the preload on your heart etc etc. That's emergency treatment. However if you had a big life threatening heart attack (known as a STEMI) to go and have an angioplasty which if caught quick enough is proved to be the best way of definitively treating it, this would cost you money if you were uninsured as it's a procedure. In the UK it would be a given.

If you had an aortic aneurysm that your family doctor spotted on examination or on an incidental finding, in the UK if it was more than 4.5cm then depending on risk factors you would go and have it repaired. In the USA this does not count as emergency treatment and so it would keep growing and growing if you were uninsured (and if you went to an insurance medical with this thing obviously they'd catch on). If this aneurysm then burst then they would admit you and give you fluids and blood to replace it in the Emergency Department, but to go in for emergency surgery unless you were insured would again cost you money, but if you didn't get this emergency surgery you would just bleed out and die.

Just because the very sick uninsured can get emergency treatment it means very little in a lot of situations.

[jim mk2]

the UK housing market farce simply cannot continue and should be controlled so that people dont have to go to the @#/? banks for money to have a future were they owe more money for a lot, lot longer than say our generation - its simply not right!

Unfortunately it is ingrained in our culture that houses are seen as an "investment" as well as a place to live. This has been true since the second world war but really took off in the 1980s when Thatcher bribed working-class people by virtually giving away council houses. The tax system has of course always been favourable towards property ownership (thankfully MIRAS was scrapped some years ago) but capital gains tax on the sale of a primary residence would be one good way of checking future house price rises.

[BiggusLaddus]

Not to mention when Brown destroyed the pension schemes, requiring people to make up the shortfall off their own backs eh Jim.