[Archived] Extra ! Extra ! Read All About It !

[Biddy]

... and Labour would have been so much better.... YAWN!

[jim mk2]

... and Labour would have been so much better.... YAWN!

Is that the best you can do ?

[Biddy]

Sorry, I just fail to see anything which vaguely suggests that a Labour government would have been any more successful.

[jim mk2]

Labour would not have embarked on a (failed) austerity drive that has delivered the weakest recovery from recession since records began. As a result Britain's balance of trade is appalling, worker productivity has suffered a severe decline relative to other advanced economies, public services and infrastructure have suffered years of ideologically driven under-investment and cuts, household debt is rising back towards pre-crisis levels on the back of another hosuing boom (and coming bust); the unreformed financial sector has been pumping up even bigger unsustainable speculative bubbles than the last one; the disposable income of workers continues to dwindle; and public debt has pretty much doubled since Gideon came to power. This is Osborne's economic "success".

[Biddy]

I get your point, but we also don't actually know if spend, spend, spend would have actually worked. Especially as the government at the time admitted it had no money to fund that anyway.

[jim mk2]

I get your point, but we also don't actually know if spend, spend, spend would have actually worked. Especially as the government at the time admitted it had no money to fund that anyway.

Who mentioned spending (usual cliched nonsense thrown at Labour) ? Byrne's note was intended as joke and the government wasn't skint anyway - the coalition's first act was to give tax cuts to millionaires.

[Biddy]

So rather than explain what you think Labour would have done by not spending money and not having austerity measures, you just jibe at the conservatives again?

[yoda]

So rather than explain what you think Labour would have done by not spending money and not having austerity measures, you just jibe at the conservatives again?

It's easier to criticize than put forward a viable alternative

[Baz]

And like I said earlier , he is growing the economy. GDP expanded by 2.2 % in 2015, by 2.9% in 2014 and by 2.2% in 2013. Better than most G8 countries and at least as good as the US . What bit of that don't you understand ? With his new living wage he's attempting to make companies pay their workers , instead of us subsidising poor wages through our taxes. You must agree with that surely? You talk about " employing a lot of people on zero hours contracts " ......you mean like the Union baron Len McClusky? If I were a socialist I'd never mention zero hours contracts again.Nice dinners about tax arrangements ? I'm assuming you're referring to Google? A question for you. How much tax did Google pay under the last Labour government? George Osborne is still in a job because despite him missing his deficit reduction targets (he has reduced it from £153 million in 2010, the year Labour left office, to £88m in 2015 ), the country didn't trust Wallace and Grommit or the two Eds as they were also affectionately known. Remember Liam Byrne's note when Labour left office last time? " Dear Chief Secretary I'm afraid there is no money . Kind regards - and good luck Liam ". Typical socialists , fantastic at spending other peoples money.

See above answer to Baz........ditto for you

The UK population has grown by over 5 percent over this period, partly due to relatively high rates of immigration. This means that last year, real GDP per person (the red line) was still 1 percent short of its pre-2008 peak. This seven year period without an increase in living standards is unprecedented in modern British history and is the reason people are dissatisfied with the current 'recovery'. Personal debt as a percentage of income is now higher than before the last crash too.

Now stop churning out the tory party PR spin, and tell me why you are better off under Osborne, But the UK population has grown by over 5 percent over this period, partly due to relatively high rates of immigration. This means that last year, real GDP per person (the red line) was still 1 percent short of its pre-crisis peak. This seven year period without an increase in living standards is unprecedented in modern British history and is the reason people are dissatisfied with the current recovery whilst not taking pot-shots at Labour, whom under Corbyn I don't back. Just because Labour are in a mess, it doesn't mean the tories are doing a good job.

Regarding google, how come Osborne said it was a big success, until the percentage was revealed at 3%, and then it was revealed that Italy had gotten more in tax on much lower revenues? Why are the government scared to release the minutes of the meetings they have had with Google?

[adopted scouser]

It's easier to criticize than put forward a viable alternative

Labour simply don't have a viable alternative, and following the disaster on Brown's watch they have proved they can't be trusted with money.

Conservative voters everywhere pray that Corbyn will be the leader for as long as is humanly possible.

Of all of the ludicrous drivel Gideon spouted over the past 6 years, the idea that the British economy has outperformed the expectations of almost everyone is the most delusional. The idea that almost everyone is surprised by how well the economy has been doing is so out-of-touch it defies belief.

Think back to 2010 remember how Gideon promised that his ideological austerity agenda would have eliminated the budget deficit entirely by now. The budget deficit hasn't been eliminated, in fact it actually got bigger in 2015 than it was in 2014.

As is always the case the right wing gave him a free pass on this absolute nonsense.

When Osborne talks about a "cocktail of threats", he knows there's another economic crash coming, so he's clearly getting his excuses in early.

Over use of 'Gideon' is a touch infantile now.

[jim mk2]

Labour simply don't have a viable alternative, and following the disaster on Brown's watch they have proved they can't be trusted with money.

Conservative voters everywhere pray that Corbyn will be the leader for as long as is humanly possible.

Over use of 'Gideon' is a touch infantile now.

Labour presided over 10 years of unbroken economic growth that only came to an end with the worldwide financial crisis of 2007-8. Brown received international acclaim for his handling of the crisis and the UK economy was out of recession and growing when he left office in 2010. I'm sorry if this doesn't suit you.

Gideon is just to remind you of the sort of people you vote for. It must be embarrassing to be a right winger.

[Baz]

Seem to remember the recession caused by the Tories economic policy of encouraging inflation in the 90's, or does that not count?

[Norbert Rassragr]

Thatcher's recessions in the early 80's (would've been worse without North Sea oil), 1987 and the one in the early 90's don't count. Just because.

[Jimmy612]

Gideon is just to remind you of the sort of people you vote for. It must be embarrassing to be a right winger.

By comparison the last elected Labour PM in became a war criminal and from then on known as Tony Bliar. Oh and we weren't even given the chance to even vote for his successor as PM.

Give me Cameron and Osborne every time in fact credit where credit is due Cameron has played an absolute blinder in avoiding the dreadful issues with recent immigrants currently being suffered by citizens across the rest of northern Europe.

[T J Hooker]

NF(pondlife) really have shown what absolutely moronic scum they are today(not that we didn't know already)

http://news.sky.com/story/1632802/three-held-at-anti-immigration-rally-in-dover

[adopted scouser]

NF(pondlife) really have shown what absolutely moronic scum they are today(not that we didn't know already)

http://news.sky.com/story/1632802/three-held-at-anti-immigration-rally-in-dover

And I'm pretty sure the trouble was caused by the anti fascist types, as usual.

[T J Hooker]

Yea, how dare they protest against fascism😕

[adopted scouser]

Yea, how dare they protest against fascism😕

You don't protest with violence, that bit escaped you.

[T J Hooker]

no you dont.....

so why did the NF(scum) travel down ' tooled up' like football hooligans in swastika covered coaches,

[Steve Moss]

Supposedly, groups within the UK are planting false or misleading stories in an effort to paint Muslims as being victims.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/12132054/Organised-campaign-to-hobble-anti-terror-fight.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Yea, how dare they protest against fascism

no you dont.....

so why did the NF(scum) travel down ' tooled up' like football hooligans in swastika covered coaches,

I can't believe I'm reading this. It was the counter-protesters (i.e. not the fascists) who resorted to violence. Your response? Blame the fascists.

People are responsible for their own actions. The leftists turned violent. The fascists did not. The leftists are responsible, the fascists are not. Simple logic, really.

[K-Hod]

Supposedly, groups within the UK are planting false or misleading stories in an effort to paint Muslims as being victims.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/12132054/Organised-campaign-to-hobble-anti-terror-fight.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

I can't believe I'm reading this. It was the counter-protesters (i.e. not the fascists) who resorted to violence. Your response? Blame the fascists.

People are responsible for their own actions. The leftists turned violent. The fascists did not. The leftists are responsible, the fascists are not. Simple logic, really.

Did you read the original link Steve? 'A swastika was painted in blood on the coach'. Unless they're some ironic 'leftists' then I'd say it was the actions of the 'fascists' wouldn't you?

[BiggusLaddus]

Did you read the original link Steve? 'A swastika was painted in blood on the coach'. Unless they're some ironic 'leftists' then I'd say it was the actions of the 'fascists' wouldn't you?

Could easily have been either of the above.

[Steve Moss]

Did you read the original link Steve? 'A swastika was painted in blood on the coach'. Unless they're some ironic 'leftists' then I'd say it was the actions of the 'fascists' wouldn't you?

Yes, I did. Here it is again, in case the article escaped you. http://news.sky.com/story/1632802/three-held-at-anti-immigration-rally-in-dover

Here's some relevant lines:

"Three people have been arrested after violence broke out at a far-right protest disrupted by anti-fascism activists in Dover."

"At one point, officers were pushed back by left-wing activists in black hooded tops and with covered faces."

"Kent Police said one person suffered a broken arm and five others were injured."

To be fair, a reporter did state that a fascist said she should be raped (which I presume was motivated by the assumption she supported Muslim immigrants). However, the big difference between the fascist and the left wingers is one used hard words and the other used violence.

Reacting to a swastika with violence is every bit as maliciously stupid as reacting with violence because some cartoonist sketched Mohammed. If you oppose the idea, present a counter-argument. Resorting to violence because one objects to words or a symbol only demonstrates that one is intellectually bankrupt.

[K-Hod]

In any case, a lot of people are acting like complete buffoons. Anyone resorting to violence is a muppet.

[T J Hooker]

I am suspicious of the 'left wing activists' I sense that they are just hired goons, pawns being played by some hire ups, where as the fascists are just plain old goons.