 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Oct 09 - 03:59 PM Labour has done a lot of things wrong but a good few things it's got right. The Tories can be expected to continue with the things Labour got wrong, and get rid of the things Labour got right. And by refusing any moves towards eletoral reform, and driving the Scots into going for full independence they are liable to be in office for a long long time. That is a very nasty propsect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Rasener Date: 02 Oct 09 - 05:28 PM >>driving the Scots into going for full independence << Thats what the scots want isn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: The Sandman Date: 02 Oct 09 - 07:15 PM Gordon Brown is not incompetent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 02 Oct 09 - 07:49 PM John McKenzie has it spot on re Blair and Brown. But Sugarfoot Jack demeans only himself in dismissing John Major as "a joke." Unlike Blair, Major was a decent and honourable guy, from a humble - in fact disadvantaged background - and with no pretensions. I can understand Skarpi's rage, but it was never the responsibility of a UK government to save Iceland's banks from themselves. The UK government couldn't even control its own banks - not that it should have had to do so. It was surely reasonable to expect the banks to take on some of the responsibility themselves, in return for the millions in bonuses that they paid Iand continue to pay) themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Will Fly Date: 03 Oct 09 - 04:36 AM Has it been forgotten that the roots of today's banking crisis were planted by Thatcher in the actions she and her government took to deregulate much of the City banking processes? Moves that were followed in the US. The natural greed - if I may say so - of banks and financial institutions was controlled to a much lesser extent and we've seen the stupidity of such things as borrowing to lend which has helped to cause the current banking crisis. It's true to say that successive post-Thatcher governments, including Gordon Brown's, have done little or nothing to do anything about it all - but it was all going so well, wasn't it? (!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Eric the Viking Date: 03 Oct 09 - 06:41 AM No Villan, not all Scots want full independence and the SNP are a minority government(But they have made some bold and courageous moves along a socialist path that have done them credit and Scotland good.) The Scots don't want the Tories, that has been clear for the past few years. An independent scotland would not, IMHO, be good for Scotland and for Britain.If there is a Tory government then quite likely there would be an independence "yes" from the Scotish people. John Major was quite a decent bloke up to a point.....his stance on "New age travellers" gave a bit of an indication and it's true he came from Brixton and not a particularly wealthy area of it, I know the flats quite well where he was brought up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 03 Oct 09 - 06:45 AM ""Short memories some people and many other younger ones no experience of what it was like. (By the way I do remember the three day week and power cuts etc and am not excusing them)"" Short memories indeed........ The Ted Heath government was presented with an impossible position by labour. The incompetence and chicanery of the preceding labour government left Heath with the poison chalice of a crippled economy, and rampant demands for impossible pay increases from all powerful trades unions. In point of fact it was UNION activists who caused the three day week, and ultimately brought down the government, leaving the next incompetent labour administration to rack up interest rates to 17.9% and inflation to an all time high of 22.9% by 1979. There were also billions of pounds of debt to the IMF. Eighteen years of Tory government produced much that was wrong, BUT, when Tony Blair took over in 1997, he inherited interest rates of 5%, inflation at 2.5%, and no IMF debt whatever. Since that time Blair, and Brown have squandered the money that they had in reserve, sold of our gold reserves, spent millions on ineffective tweaks in areas best left alone, virtually destroyed the education system by loading teachers with every kind of work EXCEPT teaching, increased unemployment, raised government debt into the stratosphere. The single area where they have had a measure of success, is in the National Health Service, although even that is marred by the monumental cock-up which allowed GPs to earn in the region of £100,000 for doing less work. I don't think you need a long memory to access the above publicly recorded facts. Now, what were we saying about how good a job New Labour has done? For those who are worried about the Tories not taking care of the poorest in the country, or caring about the working man, I will just mention one New Labour example of caring socialism. The ten pence in the pound tax band. Arbitrarily removed without thought for the consequences, in order that those earning £35,000+ might have a tax reduction. For anyone on a fixed low income, such as a pensioner with a part time job, that doubled his income tax. At least the Tories cut income tax in favour of taxes on what you spend. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: GUEST,eric the viking Date: 04 Oct 09 - 05:01 AM Just seen David Cameron on Andrew Marr. Total complete waste of time. Avoided all the questions. Especially one about personal wealth (Which was a total skirting around his supposed £30,000,000). There is not ONE chance I would vote for his lot !! Cameron, the man with less answers than Brown!! If you think the rich are suddenly going to start giving to the poor (In terms of support etc) you have another think coming. The very wealthy, public school boy and man, connecting with the poor un-employed........................SOME CHANCE. There was not one complete answer no matter how hard he was pushed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: GUEST,eric the viking Date: 04 Oct 09 - 10:17 AM "In point of fact it was UNION activists who caused the three day week." Not denying that fact. The unions have sometimes caused real problems for industry and have done much unnecessary damage but overall, all the gains in wages, employment conditions, holiday pay, workers rights etc, etc have been gained by the unions and fought for by the working people. They were NEVER given willingly. Any improvement in your working conditions has had to be fought for in the past. What ever the tories have "given" to the working people, they have given more to the richer sections of society and enhanced their lives to a greater degree. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: The Sandman Date: 04 Oct 09 - 10:30 AM what is interesting here,in relation to the three day week,was that the miners leader Joe Gormley,was reporting back [according to the Guardian newspaper] to MI5 with details of the miers union meetings. RayBuckton[ASLEF] union leader,was also according to the Guardian reporting back to MI5. it is not just football thats a funny old game. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Oct 09 - 11:56 AM The three day week was great. Any civilised society should aspire to it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: skarpi Date: 05 Oct 09 - 09:57 AM Dear Peter ,. this you wrote I can understand Skarpi's rage, but it was never the responsibility of a UK government to save Iceland's banks from themselves. The UK government couldn't even control its own banks - not that it should have had to do so. It was surely reasonable to expect the banks to take on some of the responsibility themselves, in return for the millions in bonuses that they paid Iand continue to pay) themselves. and I am just trying to explain this , we dont want UK to save Iceland , never said that . and this is my answear : UK and Holland is using the IMF against us , 1 : the IMF is not going to loan us until Icesave is save , 2 : UK And HOlland Are going work against our apply for EU , witch good for me :>)maybe not for someoneelse . 3 : and we got this comfirmed this morning on our radio from one of the party witch is in our covement. what I mean is this , you all want us to pay back the money , people lost , so do I . but if the UK and Holland are gonna play this game , the political answear is this and we got that also confirmed this morning , we will ask the IMF to leave Iceland , Icesave will go to court , and we will take our apply back for EU ,. simble as that . we will sail our sea . Now what was heard on this radio this morning , was that both UK and HOlland doesen´t want that way to happen , so what can they do , its simble Work with us instead against us , help us to solve Icesave with out but the nation into slavery , help us to " those who want" to go into EU , and get the wheels start runnin again , then we can pay back the money and start build up new and better Iceland . and for all, help us to get those basters who made this all happen to jail , take them to court if you have to , in London , most of them live there and for all I care throw them down the hole Angry I am yes , but not to the people of those countrys , I am angry at the political folks , its in favour for all to work as one not as three . may you all have a great day , smile through this and we will rise again :>) , I have lost my job , lost alot of saving , could loose my house soon , and my car , but still smiling and I am trying to think about doin as good out of all this as I can . All the best Skarpi Iceland . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Richard Bridge Date: 05 Oct 09 - 01:29 PM Don, I remember things being pretty damned good in the days of Wilson and CalorGas (and Barbara Castle - where would you be now with her pension schemes that the Milk Snatcher abolished?). The reason the Phillips curve got pushed to the right (I was saying then to my economics professors, at uni, and am still saying now) was that the unions had the power to press for wage increases, and the capitalists had the power to give themselves pay increases, so naturally the unions wanted to get as good a deal as the capitalists - and that is what the workers need to and must do in a capitalist system. Hence there was ratchet up. What should have happened, while the flight of capital was still capable of being controlled (exchange control was then still in force) was that dividends and management pay (and prices) should have been controlled, and then there would have been no need for double digit worker pay increases. The other possible would have been intentionally to default on international debt, but that would have meant a very sudden need for a balanced budget that could have been damaging. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Eric the Viking Date: 06 Oct 09 - 11:28 AM Well there are some things coming out of the tory party that are going to cause a row. The tories haven't changed. I love this idea of "make the buggers work"(Even if they are crippled). Pay freezes for the peasants, great ideas. Not much about...let's try and reduce the gap between the richest and the poorest............. It's always been well and good for the better off to tell the poorer how they should live when they have no experience of the daily struggle some people have just to exist. Cameron and clowns ltd with their millions telling someone on £65.00 a week how to live is the continual sick joke spouted by the well off. Off topic, but who decides who MI5 spy on if they are spying on the elected government? (The wealthy still pulling the strings) |
|
Subject: Can someone recommend some forex trading resource? From: GUEST,DavidPepperman Date: 06 Oct 09 - 03:46 PM Hi fellas I am new to forex market and wanted to ask if anyone could give me some insight on the subject? What course would you recommend? What is the true income potential? Is it really that risky or not? What can I earn if I invest $500? I would be grateful for any info you may share. Thanks in advance! Regards, Dave. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: GUEST,eric the viking Date: 06 Oct 09 - 06:27 PM Guest David. Try this link. It might be just want you want. On the other hand if you send me your name, date of birth, place of birth and all bank details I am sure I can find a good investment for your $500 !!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 06 Oct 09 - 07:49 PM ""Well there are some things coming out of the tory party that are going to cause a row. The tories haven't changed. I love this idea of "make the buggers work"(Even if they are crippled). Pay freezes for the peasants, great ideas. Not much about...let's try and reduce the gap between the richest and the poorest............. It's always been well and good for the better off to tell the poorer how they should live when they have no experience of the daily struggle some people have just to exist. Cameron and clowns ltd with their millions telling someone on £65.00 a week how to live is the continual sick joke spouted by the well off."" Bit off the plot there Eric. If you had been paying attention, you would have heard that the pay freeze is:- 1. Only for public sector employees. 2. Only for those public sector employees earning MORE than eighteen thousand a year (or over £364 per week) I don't see that as pay freezes for the peasants, do you? As for making the buggers work (crippled or not), that was a New Labour plan also. In fact everything that New Labour have put forward this year is planned to come into force after the general election, when somebody else can be blamed other than Gormless Gordon. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Eric the Viking Date: 07 Oct 09 - 04:54 PM As for being off the plot.........I heard and read the transcript. http://page.politicshome.com/uk/george_osborne_speech_to_conference.html By peasants I refer to people on less than the average wage, since it is they who suffer and are suffering most.(I use the term peasant not as an insult but as homogeneous descriptor which includes myself as I don't elevate myself to the ruling class.) There are about 1,000,000 public employees on £18000 pa or less. Many, many more earn only slightly more about another 1.5 million earn up to £25000).The figure of £364pwk shows how little that figure is in real spending terms (By the way that is pre tax, nat ins etc and NOT take home.) Why could they not choose a greater gross income before the freeze line? Say £22000 and above.It would have ensured that those earning around £425 a week (And arguably still less than the national average wage £479 (and private sector wage of £448, which figure is here only for comparison) had a better chance of economic survival. A greater number of people trying to keep a house and family together would stand a better chance. A family with two children trying to rent in London simply cannot afford to, similarly a mortgage to pay for a house at about £490 pm for a £92000 mortgage is beyond their reach.(Not many houses at this price) I am not arguing about private sector pay which I agree is also poor for the majority and without previous union representation and struggles would be even poorer. Public sector workers form only about 20-25% (5.8 million)of the total workforce for Britain. My point of view is that when the government (That is to say, those who wish to become..) imposes a pay freeze for less than average waged (public) workers, then it will be all too easy (And has already happened in much of the private sector) to curb wages.Employees on more than avarage wages will be far better able to sustain the problems we are facing. It would have been far better to hit the bigger money people. Who can stand the loss easier? A wealthy person with a huge income at their disposal or someone who has little (in comparison) in the first place? Wow a pay freeze when I earn £100000 plus that will make a tiny dent in my life, oh a pay freeze on my £24000 that will make a huge difference when everything gets eaten away by inflation and taxes !!! What other joyous news?.....Oh yes, work until you die. (Extend working life to save paying pensions. Of course if you've plenty 'O' dosh, you can pack up when you like and go off and enjoy yourself. Nothing about, we will freeze huge pension pay-offs for the rich I notice. There are about 2.8 million on incapacity benefit and almost4 million un-employed. If you take those on incapacity benefit and get them ready to work (By what ever means) then the un-employed figure rises, but there are still less and less jobs available. They lead a poor enough (Most of them) life style anyway and whilst the total bill for this benefit may be huge, it is only small in real terms for those receiving it. (A single euro fighter costs £66,000,000) Before the huge critisism of the those on incapacity benefit and the un-employed that takes place and does so daily(long or short term) just count yourself lucky if you don't join them.Then you may not be so keen to have your benefits stopped etc. As I said then, same old Tories, drinking champange while the rest of us drink water............... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Oct 09 - 05:35 PM Eric, I have a great deal of respect for your opinions as a rule, but you do yourself no favours by being selective with the truth to slant the picture. ""What other joyous news?.....Oh yes, work until you die. (Extend working life to save paying pensions. Of course if you've plenty 'O' dosh, you can pack up when you like and go off and enjoy yourself. Nothing about, we will freeze huge pension pay-offs for the rich I notice."" Are you expecting all those who are working between the ages of 65, and 66 to drop dead then? Who'd have thought one year extra would be lethal? Kinda forgetting that this was on New Labour's agenda aren't we? But as I said above, placed by Gordon so far in the future that he can be sure HE won't get the flak. Cameron at least had the guts to bring it forward to a time when HE will carry the can. Besides Eric, one year extra will increase the pension pots such that all those retiring at 66 will get a bit more dosh every week. How is that a negative thing, when they will be better off for the rest of their lives (admittedly not hugely so) in return for one year. You also apparently missed the bit where he said that top wage earners would eventually have to have their salaries approved by the chancellor if they exceeded that of the Prime Minister, which would knock on to lower pensions. Now of course all this COULD be so much hot air, but what have you been getting from Tony B Liar, and Gordon Brown-Nose for the last twelve years? To all those who claim there is no substance to Cameron, and he's just a smooth operator, WHEN was the last time a LABOUR leader announced measures which he knew COULD COST HIM AN ELECTION, unless the public had the sense to see that he was right?......That's right....NEVER! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Eric the Viking Date: 07 Oct 09 - 07:16 PM Sorry Don... This is a bit of a ramble...(Doing a couple of other tasks at the same time) and my slant is no less than others choose to do in their chosen direction
Work till you die.... AN exageration for alarmist sake, yet it wasn't so long ago it was true in Britain and as you can see below there are already plans afoot to increase working life. (But no less than..."Are you expecting all those who are working between the ages of 65, and 66 to drop dead then? With regard to the planned increases in retirement age..There is nothing new here. The age at which people will get the state pension is already determined. If you are 40 you need to work until you are 67 if you are 30 you need to work until you are 67 if you are 20 you will need to work until you are 68 !!(Check with DWP pension age calculator) For many these extra years could be a death knell. There are many jobs which lead to burn out !! It might be relatively easy standing in a shop or a library or even some factories, there are less demanding jobs. Of course if you are in one of the elite professions,(Mp's, legal, civil service etc) then life is generally easy any way. Police was retirement at 55 (Now 60 and 65), Military retire similarly though high rank officers can continue but you can retire with much less service; officers after 16 years and ordinary forces after 22 years.But retire at 55(generally......going to make them stay in the army then David?) Teachers,many of them get burnt out, nurses, doctors etc, etc and it isn't just the professions. I've known brickies struggling at 55 knackered from hard labour as well as miners and other manual workers...the extra year could mean death. "You also apparently missed the bit where he said that top wage earners would eventually have to have their salaries approved by the chancellor if they exceeded that of the Prime Minister, which would knock on to lower pensions." (Is that the politics of greed and envy?) Actually I didn't miss it, but I gave it little thought of merit. What he was saying in oblique terms was that as PM and Co he was going to be the top wage earner !! Anyone else would have to ask if they could have more money than him. (Can you seriously see the boss of network rail, the boss of the BBC going up and asking to keep their present salaries? Not a chance !! What is going to happen when the boss of Tory controlled Buckingham county council on £220,000 a year gets told.....sorry mate you've got a pay cut after his pay freeze? It won't work, it won't wash and it won't be carried through. These people would go to the private sector with it's huge rewards (for failure) such as banking etc. (The Tory friendship club in the city is always there) If you have read my posts you will know that I have always thought working towards equality was a good thing, greed over care for others bad. I have experience of the Tories, on a more personal level than I wish to discuss here and I don't trust them for their self centrered, divisive, ruling class attitude that generally pervades and will eventually rise again to show the old Tory is still there. Unlike new labour which changed from left to middle right(Sickeningly), the Tories have little place to move to. They will certainly not move to anything left of where they are now. I do not think they can move much further to the right, past Thatcher anyway. Their creed will always remain the same. You will also know I have nothing good to say about B Liar and express disapointment as to how things have turned out for the ordinary people of this country. And as for Cameron. The only thing he lacks is real power, he already has the money !! (£30,000,000 is enough to last anyone a lifetime, ask BLiar and his greedy Mrs!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 08 Oct 09 - 03:23 PM Agree with you about oily Tony, but, much as I dislike the lady, I believe Cherie is doing a whole lot of legal representation Pro Bono Publici. I think she has far greater moral compass than her conniving shark of a husband. I'm not going to continue the debate about Cameron. We won't agree on that one. I find it hard to see how he can be worse than the last two. Time, however, will tell. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: GUEST,eric the viking Date: 08 Oct 09 - 05:48 PM Don.I agree we'll differ about much and to draw it out towards an unpleasant end where it might become sniping rather than debate would be a sad end to some good exchages.Yes, Cherie has done some splendid work on behalf of many women's groups I agree. Time of course will tell. Best wishes. |
|
Subject: What Workout Do You Suggest To Bulk Up? From: GUEST,JasonXMan Date: 09 Oct 09 - 03:51 PM I have been testing a couple of different workouts to specifically get my shoulder's ripped? The role lift and dead weight isn't really doing anything for me, does anyone suggest any lift in particular for me to build up my shoulders? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Oct 09 - 04:17 PM The clever bit is that taking incapacity benefit from people who have been determined by some hired hatchet man to be "capable of seeking work" will not mean that they will be able to get work, because the jobs aren't going to be there that they could arguably do. It will just be a way of saving money - by taking it from some of the poorest and most damaged members of society. "Were all in it together" - if that was more than an empty slogan it ought to mean the average salary becoming the maximum salary for anyone for the duration of the crisis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: Bonzo3legs Date: 09 Oct 09 - 04:31 PM Interesting how Oxford University has slipped down the table of best university because it is ordered by this hideous government to dumb down in order to make it more accessible to the oiks. Interesting how Cambridge has stuck two fingers up! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Gordon Brown's Labour conference From: DMcG Date: 10 Oct 09 - 02:25 AM That Conservative slogan makes me think of the revised slogans from "Animal Farm": We are all in it together, but some are more in it than others. |
