Why do conservatives hate people?

First topic message reminder :

Ok, I get how conservatives selfishly grub onto money, and how they have a political philosophy of extreme individualism vs. social justice.

But here in America they can't just leave it at that. They have to go after poor people so vociferously. So it's not about protecting themselves or their money. It's about hating other people.

So why?

Sold off the gold, stealth taxes, mass immigration, dumbing down education system, illegal wars, Lisbon treaty, political correctness, doubled the housing benefit bill, soft on crime soft on causes of crime, NHS PFI madness, left office not just saying there's no money left, but with country in worst economic mess in decades.


Pushed up cost of living and wages down.


Undermined the working class British people with millions of cheap labour.


Lies and spin.


More reasons to not vote labour!!!

I wonder why people vote Labour,don't they realise what they are responsible for?

Tommy Monk wrote:Sold off the gold, stealth taxes, mass immigration, dumbing down education system, illegal wars, Lisbon treaty, political correctness, doubled the housing benefit bill, soft on crime soft on causes of crime, NHS PFI madness, left office not just saying there's no money left, but with country in worst economic mess in decades.


Pushed up cost of living and wages down.


Undermined the working class British people with millions of cheap labour.


Lies and spin.


More reasons to not vote labour!!!

That's just spin and lies and Tory propaganda Tommy.

Would you like to go through your rant and discuss each one of these one by one?

Pick whichever on you like to go first and you're rationale on it.

Ta
Irn.

did they or did they not leave a note saying "sorry no money left"?

did Brown not sell our gold off at a "knock down price"/

Well maybe some other time then then Tommy and of course the HB has already been sorted.

Meantime I'm off to watch the highlights of Hibs getting relegated. Watched it live but it's a got to see once again

nicko wrote:did Brown not sell our gold off at a "knock down price"/

Oh I just caught that nicko. Here, have a read at this and tell me how much we lost on the sale of the gold.
I'll try and get back later

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubacc/396/39603.htm

You might want to consider what was lost on Black Wednesday while you're at it.

Did labour not throw open our country to all and sundry to"rub the rights face in it"?

Irn Bru wrote:Well maybe some other time then then Tommy and of course the HB has already been sorted.




Meantime I'm off to watch the highlights of Hibs getting relegated. Watched it live but it's a got to see once again

Ah! Hibs went down then Irn?, they were 0-1 down when I last heard today, and were still 2-1 up on aggregate!!


Well, you be playing them again after all!!

Couldn't make it up eh?

Hibs, hearts and rangers in division one,,,,,ALL AT THE SAME TIME!!!!

nicko wrote:Did labour not throw open our country to all and sundry to"rub the rights face in it"?

No, that was just Tory propaganda. One at a time nicko.

Did labour not introduce the "Human Rights act"

not propergander that was the truth.

Voting Labour means the country finished, they nearly finished it the last time,DON'T let them in to do it again.

nicko wrote:Did labour not introduce the "Human Rights act"

What's the problem with the Human Rights Act? It's just the same as the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) which was introduced by the Tories way back after WWII.
Indeed it's a thoroughly Conservative principle and a legacy from Winston Churchill. Here, Jesse Norman and Peter Oborne will explain it all to you.

This is a link. Click on it.

So that's that one struck off.

nicko wrote:Voting Labour means the country finished, they nearly finished it the last time,DON'T let them in to do it again.

No, it was the collapse of the global system that nearly finished us - and much of most Western economies as well.
Up 'til that point the economy was doing rather well, indeed it was in a better shape than they found it. See earlier post with information from the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

David Cameron even blamed much of it on the actions of Maggie Thatcher with her big bang deregulation of the financial markets.

nicko wrote:not propergander that was the truth.

Sorry nicko but it was all bollocks.

Former Labour adviser denies immigration plot to undermine right

A former Labour adviser at the centre of claims that the government secretly encouraged mass immigration to turn Britain into a "truly multicultural society" and undermine the Tories today made clear "there was no such plot".

The shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, challenged ministers in the Commons today over remarks by Andrew Neather, a former speechwriter to Tony Blair and special adviser to Barbara Roche when she was immigration minister.

But Neather, now comment editor of the London Evening Standard, said an article he wrote in the aftermath of the television appearance of the BNP leader, Nick Griffin, had been twisted out of all recognition.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/oct/26/labour-immigration-plot-andrew-neather

Next..............

A "former Labour leader" he would say that wouldn't he!!!

Sorry irn, the Labour party were responsible for the mess they left this country in and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. If they get in again the country is doomed. Please take your blinkers off!!

nicko wrote:A "former Labour leader"    he would say that wouldn't he!!!

He wasn't a 'former Labour Leader'. He was the guy that is supposed to have said it and he's telling people that what he said was twisted out of all recognition.

Can you show me what he actually said?

nicko wrote:Sorry irn, the Labour party were responsible for the mess they left this country in and nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. If they get in again the country is doomed.  Please take your blinkers off!!

I've backed up what really happened with hard evidence - you have not.

Your going off topic Irn, the Labour party left this country in the shit , do you agree with that?

nicko wrote:Your going off topic Irn,  the Labour party left this country in the shit , do you agree with that?

I'm bang on topic and I've just told you that the country was left in the shit because of the collapse of the global banking system caused by the bankers.

Were Labour responsible for the collapse of so many other western economies as well then?

Any country that follows Labour polices will find themselves in the shit. IRN, I appreciate calm arguments, but we will never agree on Labour polices so lets call it a day and agree to disagree. Have a good day mate.

nicko wrote:Any country that follows Labour polices will find themselves in the shit.  IRN,  I appreciate calm arguments, but we will never agree on Labour polices so lets call it a day and agree to disagree. Have a good day mate.

Okay dokay nicko but I'll leave you with this to ponder over for next time maybe..

Recent times have indeed been turbulent. After a decade and a half of stability, with rising employment and living standards, came the crisis and recession - the biggest economic upheaval since the Great Depression. Before the crisis, steady growth with low inflation and high employment was in our grasp. We let it slip - we, that is, in the financial sector and as policy-makers - not your members nor the many businesses and organisations around the country which employ them. And although the causes of the crisis may have been rooted in the financial sector, the consequences are affecting everyone, and will continue to do so for years to come.
Thankfully, the costs of the crisis have been smaller than those of the Great Depression. But only because we learnt from that experience. An unprecedented degree of policy stimulus, here and abroad, prevented another world slump. Even so, around a million more people in Britain are out of work than before the crisis. Many, especially the young unemployed, have had their futures blighted.

Mervyn King – Governor of the Bank of England

======================================

I have to admit that we, the Conservative Party, didn't see this as early as we could have."
There were other areas where Tory party policy had gone wrong, he said, such as basing its plans on the hope that economic growth would continue.
In a striking admission, Mr Cameron said not all of the present problems had been created since Labour came to power almost 12 years ago. "If we're honest we must recognise that some of our economic difficulties today relate not only to what has happened in the last ten years, but also to fundamental weaknesses that have been there for decades," he said.
These remarks could upset Tory traditionalists who will see it as a partial apology for Thatcherite policies.

David Cameron – Prime Minister

http://www.scotsman.com/news/cameron-apologises-for-past-tory-failings-over-economy-1-1029731

==================================


Over the first eleven years of Labour government, from 1997 to the eve of the financial crisis in 2007, the UK public finances followed a remarkably similar pattern to the first eleven years of the previous Conservative government, from 1979 to 1989. The first four saw the public sector move from deficit to surplus, while the following seven saw a move back into the red.
By 2007 Labour had reduced public sector borrowing slightly below the level it inherited from the Conservatives.• And more of that borrowing was being used to finance investment rather than the day-to-day running costs of the public sector. Labour had also reduced public sector debt below the level it had inherited. As a result the ‘golden rule’ and ‘sustainable investment rule’ that Gordon Brown had committed himself to on becoming Chancellor in 1997 were both met over the economic cycle that he eventually decided had run from 1997–98 to 2006–07.

Institute for Fiscal Studies 2010

As you can see from the yellow line, debt/%gdp was coming down in first couple Of years after labour took govt and was continuing Tory spending plans, then after labour got their changes implemented, it started rising, then on a massive trajectory up!


And that borrowing does not include all the other 'off balance sheet' borrowing that was also going on.


And the credit based consumer spending was keeping the economy afloat, not good labour economic policies.



And a guardian or Scotsman article showing labour in A good light is not evidence of anything.


They are as staunchly pro labour as you are iron, totally biased and just as full of shit!



Lies and spin is a key tool of the lefties.

Original Quill wrote:Ok, I get how conservatives selfishly grub onto money, and how they have a political philosophy of extreme individualism vs. social justice.

But here in America they can't just leave it at that.  They have to go after poor people so vociferously.  So it's not about protecting themselves or their money.  It's about hating other people.

So why?

I truly believe that Socialism spreads the misery equally whilst Capitalalism spreads the good unequally.

You delusional lefties argue that we need a Socialist or Communist society and then cry foul when we point out that every model has failed and I'm including Sweden in that.

Benevolent capitalism in infinitely superior to misguided Socialism. If Red Ed gets into power you can be certain the recovery will be stopped dead in its tracks and we shall have real debt problems as revenues collapse again as he tries to ramp up taxes.

You pompous lefties especially you Quill think you are ever so superior and for example have decried this Coalitions spending reductions at every turn. oreover you have supported France at every turn.

Guess what you have been shown to be wrong again but that dense cranium of yours doesn't allow anything in which doesn't fit your perverted truths.

Irn Bru wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Sold off the gold, stealth taxes, mass immigration, dumbing down education system, illegal wars, Lisbon treaty, political correctness, doubled the housing benefit bill, soft on crime soft on causes of crime, NHS PFI madness, left office not just saying there's no money left, but with country in worst economic mess in decades.


Pushed up cost of living and wages down.


Undermined the working class British people with millions of cheap labour.


Lies and spin.


More reasons to not vote labour!!!

That's just spin and lies and Tory propaganda Tommy.

Would you like to go through your rant and discuss each one of these one by one?

Pick whichever on you like to go first and you're rationale on it.

Ta
Irn.

I can't believe it...I was just thinking the same.

Tommy...I can say you are ugly and your mother dresses you funny. But that's just the rumour until I prove it. Again...that's the problem with Conservatives and Republicans...fabrication is the same for them as facts. There is no reality for conservatives. That is the reason why liberals and conservatives are not merely different brands...but wholly different species.

Quill, what I say is true.


You can easily find proof of everything I mentioned.



Sadly denial is also a big feature of the lefties.



Problem is still, you are comparing your democrats and republicans to our labour and Tory, but if you actually looked into it a bit, you will find our Tory are more like your democrats!!!

Alright said Fred wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Ok, I get how conservatives selfishly grub onto money, and how they have a political philosophy of extreme individualism vs. social justice.

But here in America they can't just leave it at that.  They have to go after poor people so vociferously.  So it's not about protecting themselves or their money.  It's about hating other people.

So why?

I truly believe that Socialism spreads the misery equally whilst Capitalalism spreads the good unequally.

Please, no more jingles and children's rhymes.  Please state your case with factual allegations and evidence.  As I understand it, Capitalism is a system with another mouth to feed: capital, through profits.  Socialism, therefore, eliminates the extra mouth to feed through the social unit providing the capital and eliminating the profit.  It is a vast improvement in economic theory.

Now, you have something to say?  Say it it distinct terms.

Alright said Fred wrote:You delusional lefties argue that we need a Socialist or Communist society and then cry foul when we point out that every model has failed and I'm including Sweden in that.

Nonsense.  Socialism has been incrementally adopted in western society, even the US.  The largest and most successful Socialist organization in the world is the US Military.  Owned by the people, financed by the people, operated for the benefit of the people, the participants (soldiers and sailors) are the labour or employees, if you like, of a Socialist unit.  The US Military is the finest in the world, and not only as a military production unit...but as the finest of any kind of production unit.

Alright said Fred wrote:Benevolent capitalism in infinitely superior to misguided Socialism. If Red Ed gets into power you can be certain the recovery will be stopped dead in its tracks and we shall have real debt problems as revenues collapse again as he tries to ramp up taxes.

Nonsense.  Relax the sphincters, use toilet paper to wipe yourself off, and get off the can so you can engage the mind.  Obama has achieved the recovery in the US.  He brought us out of the depths of another Great Depression passed on to us by Bush and Cheney, he has consistently handed us six-figure new jobs figures on a monthly basis, and whereas Republicans had the US in 10%+ unemployment when they left office, Democrats have reduced unemployment in the US to under 7%.  The Wall Street market is posting record heights, the banking and insurance industry have been set aright and two egomaniacally expensive wars have been shut down--even while we got Osama bin Laden.  Lefties take care of business, while righties wallow in their own shit.

Alright said Fred wrote:You pompous lefties especially you Quill think you are ever so superior and for example have decried this Coalitions spending reductions at every turn.  oreover you have supported France at every turn.

Guess what you have been shown to be wrong again but that dense cranium of yours doesn't allow anything in which doesn't fit your perverted truths.

Well, the proof is in the pudding, Fred.  What you rightys leave in the toilet, we lefties have to flush.  Loyally and faithfully, we clean up after you slovenly sort and we always seem not only to get the job done, but leave room to exceed all expectations.  Recall, while you righties were crying and moaning about how liberals were sending the world to hell in a hand basket, Democratic President Clinton left the US Treasury with a $236-billion surplus at the end of his administration.  By contrast, the righty do-nothing government closed in 2008, managing to lift the deficit to $17-trillion in eight short years.  

Enough to bring up the second Great Depression to our steps in October, 2008...recall GWB, hat in hand, weeping on TV and admitted he needed special legislation to bail the economy out.

That's your capitalist...weak, weepy and incompetent.

Tommy Monk wrote:



As you can see from the yellow line, debt/%gdp was coming down in first couple Of years after labour took govt and was continuing Tory spending plans, then after labour got their changes implemented, it started rising, then on a massive trajectory up!


And that borrowing does not include all the other 'off balance sheet' borrowing that was also going on.


And the credit based consumer spending was keeping the economy afloat, not good labour economic policies.



And a guardian or Scotsman article showing labour in A good light is not evidence of anything.


They are as staunchly pro labour as you are iron, totally biased and just as full of shit!



Lies and spin is a key tool of the lefties.

Read that graph again and you can see that it backs up the IFS statement that prior to the banking collapse the national debt was lower than the amount they inherited from the Tories. You need to read the other line that shows the GDP figure because that's how you measure the debt in real terms - not by the amount of money that rises due to inflation.

And credit based consumer spending was the direct result of Thatcher deregulating the financial markets and that's pretty much what analysts are suggesting is happening now.

And the article in The Scotsman is quoting from the speech that David Cameron gave to the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce in 2009 - right on the back of him and Osborne having previously pledged to match and exceed Labour's spending plans.

And remember they were also calling for Britain to copy the Irish economic model (the Celtic Tiger) only for him to have to stump up £7.5 billion when he took office to help bail them out when the crunch came. What a couple of clowns

No, the borrowing/%ofgdp is the figure you really need to follow.


But, both are on that graph, and besides which one you look at, they both show that borrowing was starting to decline when labour took office, as they were following Tory spending plans, then by 2002 when labours economic plans had been implemented, borrowing started rising, then took off through the roof!


Don't forget they sold off loads of gold early on too which lessened the borrowing, plus all the stealth taxes they brought in.


And There was billions of off balance PFI not showing there too.


The evidence is undeniable, except of course, denied by The leftie pro labour numpties, who would tell you grass is red and the sky is down.

Tommy Monk wrote:No, the borrowing/%ofgdp is the figure you really need to follow.


But, both are on that graph, and besides which one you look at, they both show that borrowing was starting to decline when labour took office, as they were following Tory spending plans, then by 2002 when labours economic plans had been implemented, borrowing started rising, then took off through the roof!


Don't forget they sold off loads of gold early on too which lessened the borrowing, plus all the stealth taxes they brought in.


And There was billions of off balance PFI not showing there too.


The evidence is undeniable, except of course, denied by The leftie pro labour numpties, who would tell you grass is red and the sky is down.

Yes, that's the line I'm following and that's the one that backs up the IFS statement that prior to the financial collapse that the national debt was lower than when Labour came to power.

Here, read this about the sale of the gold and don't get carried away with all the nonsense that is being fed to you.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubacc/396/39603.htm

Let me know how you get on.

Stealth taxes!!! I think you had better read this....

99 Red Baloons

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/factcheck+has+brown+raised+stealth+tax+99+times/324047.html

And of course PFI was the brainchild of John Major and George Osborne has dived in and used it just as much even n his short spell as Chancer of the Exchequer.

Tommy, you didn't comment on Osborne and Cameron pledging to match and exceed Labour's aspending plans or following the Irish economic model.

What's up - a step too far for you, is it?

This is a two-way debate surely.

Look at the graph iron.
Was declining when labour came in, helped by sale of gold, then started rising in 2002 at an undeniable upward trend as labours economic mismanagement took hold.
And just saying Tory/major did PFI does not excuse the madness that happened under labour with these contracts.
They signed off masses of PFI contracts and all costing billions and billions more to taxpayer than they should have, through labours sheer economic incompetence, none showed on balance sheet/spending/borrowing levels, but added to the costs later on which fueled the borrowing later on to pay for them.
There are still cuts in services now because the local NHS budgets are having to pay for these extortionate deals done under labours financial incompetence.
But the bottom line is that after a short time of labours economic policies kicking in, you can clearly see the rise in borrowing.
The sale of gold and off balance sheet PFI spending hid the true cost of spending early on, stealth taxes softened blow for a little while longer but then they ran out of hiding places and the true costs spiraled out of control.
I know you think, as a true leftie labour supporter, that anyone criticising labour must therefore be a Tory and subsequently be hated and All truth denied, but come on mate......!!!
Your denials are just making you look like a liar....
As a true labour supporter, you should be hounding them for their failures more than anyone else.
As they have let you down more than anyone.... surely???

Tommy Monk wrote:Look at the graph iron.
Was declining when labour came in, helped by sale of gold, then started rising in 2002 at an undeniable upward trend as labours economic mismanagement took hold.
And just saying Tory/major did PFI does not excuse the madness that happened under labour with these contracts.
They signed off masses of PFI contracts and all costing billions and billions more to taxpayer than they should have, through labours sheer economic incompetence, none showed on balance sheet/spending/borrowing levels, but added to the costs later on which fueled the borrowing later on to pay for them.
There are still cuts in services now because the local NHS budgets are having to pay for these extortionate deals done under labours financial incompetence.
But the bottom line is that after a short time of labours economic policies kicking in, you can clearly see the rise in borrowing.
The sale of gold and off balance sheet PFI spending hid the true cost of spending early on, stealth taxes softened blow for a little while longer but then they ran out of hiding places and the true costs spiraled out of control.
I know you think, as a true leftie labour supporter, that anyone criticising labour must therefore be a Tory and subsequently be hated and All truth denied, but come on mate......!!!
Your denials are just making you look like a liar....
As a true labour supporter, you should be hounding them for their failures more than anyone else.
As they have let you down more than anyone.... surely???

Simple question. What was the figure in 1997 and what was the figure in 2007?

You haven't read what happened to the funds that were generated from the sale of the gold have you? Go and read the link I gave you and come back and tell me what they did with the money.

You did read that Osborne has dived into PFI just as Labour did or are you just ignoring it? The Tories left our infrastructure a decaying wreck due to starving the nation of the funds needed to rebuild it all. That had tax revenues galore from the oil and tons from selling off the family silver and they blew it all. PFI is no different from what was happening on major capital expenditure contracts where almost every one came in late and usually at double the original estimates where the tax payer ended up paying huge sums more than what was budgeted for. You're policy appears to be that nothing should be done and hospitals and schools should just be left to rot because we were skint. Typical Tory thinking in that people who have the dosh can always go private and the rest of the nation can just get along with what's left.

And I'm not lying - I've given you the facts but you just appear to want to ignore them.

So Tory were a bit bad so that excuses labour for being worse?


Come on mate..... I don't care for labour or Tory, I care about the country as a whole and will criticise both with equal venom.



You however, will deny any labour wrong doing and wriggle and twist everything to blame everything and everybody else to defend them.

Tommy Monk wrote:So Tory were a bit bad so that excuses labour for being worse?


Come on mate..... I don't care for labour or Tory, I care about the country as a whole and will criticise both with equal venom.



You however, will deny any labour wrong doing and wriggle and twist everything to blame everything and everybody else to defend them.

I haven't twisted anything and have backed up everything I've said with figures and independent evidence from reliable sources.

And you really haven’t learned anything from this discussion because if you had you would have seen that it’s the lies, the deceit, the hypocrisy and distorting of the facts of what actually happened over the past few decades that is dribbling out of the Tories and their media machine that I’m getting at.

Labour did plenty wrong notably not regulating our banking sector with the Tories cheering away and calling for even more deregulation. They were in it up too their necks and were even worse.

You say that you are equally critical of the Tories yet I haven’t had a peep out of you even though I gave you a couple of examples to comment on regarding Osborne and Cameron. You had your chance and didn’t take it so please spare me the nonsense you are coming out with now about equal venom.

You said borrowing was going down, I showed a graph that clearly showed it was rising from 2002.


I said labour had complete economic madness over PFI contracts they signed off that has drained billions out of NHS budget and resulted in services closing.

You said 'oh well john major dreamed up PFI and Osborne has signed of some too'.

Skirting over labours colossal fuck ups and forgetting that PFI isn't a bad thing when used sensibly and with careful watch on overall costs.


Labour selling off the gold at phenomenaly low rates is undeniable, the money was spent, and if they hadn't sold it then they would have had to borrow more, pushing up the borrowing figures I showed even more.


They did raise taxes, many stealth taxes were brought in, again undeniable, I never said it was 99.


They flooded this country with millions of immigrants, the number of Muslims here doubled under labour. And we all saw the influx from eastern Europe after, they decided not to put controls in place in 2004.

This pushed up cost of living and drove down wages, rents went through the roof as a result which saw the housing benefit bill double under labour to about 20 billion.


House owners saw their values rising more each month than they were getting from work which fueled the spending spree that propped up the economy, all on credit of course, people re mortgaging to cash in and spend.


But bad news for younger people who saw the dream of home ownership slipping further and further away as it became increasingly unaffordable. But instead saddled with extortionate rents. Taking ever increasing chunks of their stagnating wages.

All labour MPs however were doing well at their own property speculating.....


Labour also brought back in the mayor of London, costing Londoners even more billions each year. With red ken then bringing in the congestion charge costing us even more.

In fact labour brought in loads of extra and expensive and unnecessary layers of bureaucracy, quangos, pen pushers and box tickers. All paid for by the tax payer at enormous cost.

And it was labour who brought in the FSA which was a toothless dog from the start. But again, enormously expensive.


It was no coincidence that labour lackys ended up with the top jobs in these newly created quangos And layers of bureaucracy, And of course it helped them to fudge the unemployment figures somewhat too.



All recipie for disaster, which inevitably happened....

Tommy

That’s just another rant and most of it has already been covered but just for you I’ll go through all that line by line this time.

Tommy Monk wrote:You said borrowing was going down, I showed a graph that clearly showed it was rising from 2002.

No, the graph shows what the figures were in 1997 and in 2007 before the recession started which backs up the data given by the IFS that Labour had paid down the national debt.. I asked you before to say what the figures were for these years but you appear to be avoiding doing so. Here’s your chance again.

Tommy Monk wrote:I said labour had complete economic madness over PFI contracts they signed off that has drained billions out of NHS budget and resulted in services closing.
You said 'oh well john major dreamed up PFI and Osborne has signed of some too'
Skirting over labours colossal fuck ups and forgetting that PFI isn't a bad thing when used sensibly and with careful watch on overall costs.

Major did introduce it an in one of their PFI efforts they lost millions on trying to merge some London hospitals together and the upgrade to Barts. Also..
.
From the National Audit Office...

"By introducing an Infrastructure Finance Unit, the Treasury helped reactivate the market and prevent the stalling of many government projects. During 2009, the cost of finance built into the PFI programmes at that time was value for money, but there is no guarantee that it will remain that way. Now that the market is providing finance again, a project by project review should be carried out using stricter criteria, to establish the most appropriate funding methods."
Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, 27 July 2010
And on Osborne...
George Osborne, the chancellor, is pressing ahead with private finance initiative (PFI) projects on a multibillion-pound scale despite having dismissed the infrastructure funding mechanism as "discredited" when he was in opposition, research has revealed.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2011/apr/18/george-osborne-backs-pfi-projects

Tommy Monk wrote:Labour selling off the gold at phenomenaly low rates is undeniable, the money was spent, and if they hadn't sold it then they would have had to borrow more, pushing up the borrowing figures I showed even more.

I gave you the report from parliament to read which explains about the gold price and about re-investing the proceeds in assets that provided a return which gold didn't do. Go and read it.

Tommy Monk wrote:They did raise taxes, many stealth taxes were brought in, again undeniable, I never said it was 99.

I never said YOU did. Here’s the gen again.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/factcheck+has+brown+raised+stealth+tax+99+times/324047.html
And who raised VAT? Always the Tories – never Labour.

Tommy Monk wrote:They flooded this country with millions of immigrants, the number of Muslims here doubled under labour. And we all saw the influx from eastern Europe after, they decided not to put controls in place in 2004.

Covered this already and I got a result out of you on it on another thread. Thanks

Tommy Monk wrote:This pushed up cost of living and drove down wages, rents went through the roof as a result which saw the housing benefit bill double under labour to about 20 billion.

Because Thatcher deregulated the rental sector. And the housing benefit trebled – yes trebled – under the Tories.

Tommy Monk wrote:House owners saw their values rising more each month than they were getting from work which fueled the spending spree that propped up the economy, all on credit of course, people re mortgaging to cash in and spend.

Who deregulated the financial system – the big bang? Just like Cameron said – problems going back 30 years.

Tommy Monk wrote:ut bad news for younger people who saw the dream of home ownership slipping further and further away as it became increasingly unaffordable. But instead saddled with extortionate rents. Taking ever increasing chunks of their stagnating wages.

I think you have the time period wrong. You’re thinking of the 80s when inflation reached double digit proportions putting many people out of their homes due to being unable to make the mortgage payments.

Tommy Monk wrote:All labour MPs however were doing well at their own property speculating.....

Just Labour MPs was it?  Prove that.

Tommy Monk wrote:Labour also brought back in the mayor of London, costing Londoners even more billions each year. With red ken then bringing in the congestion charge costing us even more.

How could they bring back the Mayor of London?  Was there one before year 2000? I’m sure that position was just created after a referendum and Ken Livingstone won it. Sure that was the year that Archer had to drop out because he had been convicted of perjury. You didn’t mention Livingstone’s Fares fair policy or the reason for the congestion charge.

Tommy Monk wrote:In fact labour brought in loads of extra and expensive and unnecessary layers of bureaucracy, quangos, pen pushers and box tickers. All paid for by the tax payer at enormous cost.

Public sector employment was higher under the Tories than under Labour.

Tommy Monk wrote:And it was labour who brought in the FSA which was a toothless dog from the start. But again, enormously expensive.

Fair enough but being toothless seemed to be what the Tories wanted anyway = less regulation.

Tommy Monk wrote:It was no coincidence that labour lackys ended up with the top jobs in these newly created quangos And layers of bureaucracy, And of course it helped them to fudge the unemployment figures somewhat too.

That’s what all governments do and you would be a fool to think that only Labour put it’s own people in place . Get real. How did they fudge the unemployment figures?

Tommy Monk wrote:All recipie for disaster, which inevitably happened....

The disaster came about because of the collapse of the global banking system and I’ve shown you evidence from various different sources that it was.

Still haven’t seen this equal venom that you mentioned. You’re a chancer Tommy.
 

Tommy ,Irn has provided you with many facts from the most credible links, we would appreciate if you stop faffing about going in circles with the same stuff that you have been corrected on, or indeed your own query answered.

Not trying to be cheeky Tommy, but you keep repeating the same things.

Two links, one from guardian and other about denying that there were 99 stealth taxes when I never said there were 99.


And the rest is just more regular leftie diversion/deflection/denial and basically saying 'it was The Torys wot did it' rubbish....



Pathetic!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:Two links, one from guardian and other about denying that there were 99 stealth taxes when I never said there were 99.


And the rest is just more regular leftie diversion/deflection/denial and basically saying 'it was The Torys wot did it' rubbish....



Pathetic!!!

Links from the IFS, the Guardian, The Scotsman and direct quotes from David Cameron and the Governor of the Bank of England stating their views.

Where's the equal venom Tommy? You're a chancer sounding like one of the biggest ranters doon the pub spouting what they've been fed by the Tories and papers like the Daily Mail or RW bloggers and posters coming out with distorted rubbish.

Get a grip FGS

You sound like a deluded leftie who will bend over backwards to deny any labour wrongdoing and catastrophic errors.



The guardian and Scotsman are hardly helping your cause, being both pro labour wank rags.


Look at the graph man.


The evidence is undeniable.


Look at the immigration figures.


The evidence is undeniable.



Everything I said is true.


Lies and spin and the classic 'oh it was the Tories that done it' just don't wash I'm afraid.

Tommy Monk wrote:You sound like a deluded leftie who will bend over backwards to deny any labour wrongdoing and catastrophic errors.

I've already said that Labour made mistakes like not regulating the banks - all supported by the Tories.

Tommy Monk wrote:The guardian and Scotsman are hardly helping your cause, being both pro labour wank rags.


Look at the graph man.


The evidence is undeniable.

What about the IFS, the governor of the Bank of England and David Cameron's statement which the Scotsman quoted verbatim?

And I have  looked at the graph. What were the figures in 1997 and 2007? They support the IFS analysis that up until the collapse of the global banking system Labour had paid down the national debt below what they inherited from the Tories,

Tommy Monk wrote:Look at the immigration figures.


The evidence is undeniable.



Everything I said is true.

And I told you that immigration from the EU came off the back of the Maastricht Treaty signed by the Tories. You have already conceded that point on another thread.

Tommy Monk wrote:Lies and spin and the classic 'oh it was the Tories that done it' just don't wash I'm afraid.

It wasn't just  Labour and you have already conceded that point as well on another thread.[/quote]

I'm trying to take you seriously but all you are doing is ranting away and producing nothing to dispute the evidence I have provided.

Get some sleep Tommy and I'll check back in the morning to see what you have managed to come up with.

Tommy,it's not gonna matter what evidence is provided to you, your still going to ignore it and go round in circles and divert by accusing others who provide their evidence to you.


Have you not read a word Irn replied with?, he has taken the time to answer many of your questions or answer your theories...at least respect that man ffs and being a wee runaway and sneak...

Just what is it with some of you RW eh?, you ask and doubt something, someone gives you the evidence and you then run off claiming it's all bullshit and that only you are right even when proved wrong.

Very poor and dishonourable Tommy.

Tommy Monk wrote:You sound like a deluded leftie who will bend over backwards to deny any labour wrongdoing and catastrophic errors.



The guardian and Scotsman are hardly helping your cause, being both pro labour wank rags.


Look at the graph man.


The evidence is undeniable.


Look at the immigration figures.


The evidence is undeniable.



Everything I said is true.


Lies and spin and the classic 'oh it was the Tories that done it' just don't wash I'm afraid.

..oh yes Tommy,,,with such  a solid an argument as the above, you must be right and Irn must be wrong  



Innit?

If you can't admit borrowing was declining when labour took office and then started rising in 2002, even though it is clearly shown in the graph provided, then what hope is there of any further honest and rational debate about anything else....???

Tommy Monk wrote:If you can't admit borrowing was declining when labour took office and then started rising in 2002, even though it is clearly shown in the graph provided, then what hope is there of any further honest and rational debate about anything else....???

Tommy, it was coming down from 1997/1998 not before so just admit that the IFS were correct in that Labour lowered the public sector net debt below the level it inherited from the Tories and be done with it. Here's the figures and a graph...

Public sector debt as % of GDP:
• 1997 – 40.4% of GDP
• 2007 – 36.4% of GDP



Watch this as well - classic Osborne.

As shown, was declining when following Tory spending plans, then rising from 2001-2 onwards.

It's a real shame some just can't admit facts laid out in front of them, then just move on...

Come on Tommy, play like a man.