Song For Ed.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]That''s the idea, hope the government messes up. Yep, that will be good for us and the country.[/quote]

If you''re referring to my post, where do I say that I hope they mess up ? I said the situation is reminiscent of 1992 which turned out badly.

Personally I thought it was Hobson''s choice at the election. If Labour got in, propped up by the SNP, I had serious concerns that they''d mess up the economy by overspending. With the Tories, we now have a massive bunfight over the EU to look forward to. On balance it''s probably the lesser of two weevils but... like I say, it reminds of 1992 too much to be comfortable.

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote] user="It''s Character Forming"][quote user="Crafty Canary"]That''s the idea, hope the government messes up. Yep, that will be good for us and the country.[/quote] If you''re referring to my post, where do I say that I hope they mess up ? I said the situation is reminiscent of 1992 which turned out badly. Personally I thought it was Hobson''s choice at the election. If Labour got in, propped up by the SNP, I had serious concerns that they''d mess up the economy by overspending. With the Tories, we now have a massive bunfight over the EU to look forward to. On balance it''s probably the lesser of two weevils but... like I say, it reminds of 1992 too much to be comfortable.[/quote]

 

Yes, they''ll implode big time, they always do, you just can''t trust the Tories with anything. Based on their track record we''ll still have a deficit and it will be someone else''s fault.

 

 

[Molly Windley 76]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"][quote user="Mello Yello"]

So if Milliband had been voted PM, you''re telling me that those with left and socialist leanings wouldn''t be all over here showing empathy to those who have Conservative views?.......Hypocrisy at its finest......

 

Ed Balls won''t struggle to maintain the lifestyle he and his spouse and family are accustomed to. Where as when I was made unemployed - and until I found work again, I made financial sacrifices and cut my cloth accordingly.....

 

He''s a big lad, he''ll get by......Why aren''t folk discussing why this political heavyweight lost his seat to someone younger and new to politics?......There must be a reason?......  

 [/quote]

I''m actually glad Ed Balls lost his seat as the Labour party need new economic ideas and a new frontman (or woman) to articulate them.  Ed Balls was for too long the equivalent of a sacked football league manager who turns up as a pundit at half time and tries to explain what the current managers are doing wrong, i.e. even when he makes a valid point people remember the mistakes he made when he was in post.

I''m sure he''ll be fine and Delia will appoint him to the board of directors forthwith.

Stephen Fry and Ed Balls, my my. If only Wiz woz still ''ere.

[/quote]

That would be a board of Fry UP  Balls UP  Mcn Ally UP ....  Im stuck now

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]You''re looking for tories with empathy, Purple. Your search may not bear fruit.[/quote]Touché, BBB. I don''t begrudge the Tories a perod of triumphalism (the only purple in my household, Snoots, is my Fiorentina scarf) but I suspect when the dust has settled this victory may not seem so altogether a good thing. The word "pyrrhic" might even start to be used.If at the end of another five years of - increased - austerity  the economy has not recovered as promised and real people feel no better off then the election mantra of "Give us even more time to finish the job" will be met with derision.And if the Tories have been governing on their own, or with the occasional help of the Ulster Unionists, the blame will fall entirely on them. They won''t have the LibDems to take the fall for them (exactly as Angela Merkel, who knows a thing or two about coalitions, told Clegg would happen back in 2010. A few decades will have to pass before the LibDems again prop up the Tories.Then there is the divisive question of what to do about Scotland. And the even more divisive question of a referedum on Europe. If, as has been reported, prospective Tory candidates had to pass an "Anti-EU" test to be selected then all hell will break loose.Not forgetting that Cameron has said he won''t serve a full term, which raises the prospect of even more Tory infighting between Boris and whoever.[/quote]

Austerity? When you are spending more than you are earning that is not austerity , my dear man.

We are about the 7th richest country in the world, that s not austerity.

Social benefits are extremely generous in this country. I know, I have been on them for a time. No one starves in this country unless they choose to blow their benefits on dope, booze, gambling or some other vice.

Austerity for you middle-class socialists is Waitrose delivering your wine order late.

[......and Smith must score. 1,343]

[quote user="whoareyou"]Balls is a big part responsible for the debt mess we are in so I have no sympathy for him getting the boot.....[/quote]Well he must be more cunning than we all thought as he''s never been Chancellor of the Exchequer [;)]

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="Crafty Canary"]Silly old BBB, just cannot accept that most people see Tories as hard working, disciplined people prepared to take tough measures to correct the problems caused by socialist mismanagement.

IDS is doing a great job helping people back into gainful employment. I do, however, accept that the bedroom tax is a misguided policy and should be abolished.[/quote]Perhaps not the wisest idea to boast of having a high IQ and then getting wrong something as simple as who posted what. BBB never mentioned Iain Duncan Smith. It was I.

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="Its Character Forming"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]You''re looking for tories with empathy, Purple. Your search may not bear fruit.[/quote]Touché, BBB. I don''t begrudge the Tories a perod of triumphalism (the only purple in my household, Snoots, is my Fiorentina scarf) but I suspect when the dust has settled this victory may not seem so altogether a good thing. The word "pyrrhic" might even start to be used.If at the end of another five years of - increased - austerity  the economy has not recovered as promised and real people feel no better off then the election mantra of "Give us even more time to finish the job" will be met with derision.And if the Tories have been governing on their own, or with the occasional help of the Ulster Unionists, the blame will fall entirely on them. They won''t have the LibDems to take the fall for them (exactly as Angela Merkel, who knows a thing or two about coalitions, told Clegg would happen back in 2010. A few decades will have to pass before the LibDems again prop up the Tories.Then there is the divisive question of what to do about Scotland. And the even more divisive question of a referedum on Europe. If, as has been reported, prospective Tory candidates had to pass an "Anti-EU" test to be selected then all hell will break loose.Not forgetting that Cameron has said he won''t serve a full term, which raises the prospect of even more Tory infighting between Boris and whoever.[/quote]

Some very good points. Personally disappointed for Ed Balls losing his seat. I think a key problem for him/ Milliband was not being able or willing to distance themselves from the over-spending of the last Labour government. I always thought he did a decent job as shadow chancellor but never overcame that problem.

The new Tory government reminds me of 1992 in lots of ways. That didn''t work out so well for them...[/quote]The problem was more the perception of overspending, carefully cultivated by the Tories, and linked to the great crash, As Paul Krugman explains in the New York Times, it was an election won on a false narrative:"It’s a story about Britain that runs like this: First, the Labour

government that ruled Britain until 2010 was wildly irresponsible,

spending far beyond its means. Second, this fiscal profligacy caused the

economic crisis of 2008-2009. Third, this in turn left the coalition

that took power in 2010 with no choice except to impose austerity

policies despite the depressed state of the economy. Finally, Britain’s

return to economic growth in 2013 vindicated austerity and proved its

critics wrong."Now, every piece of this story is demonstrably, ludicrously wrong. Pre-crisis Britain wasn''t fiscally profligate.

Debt and deficits were low, and at the time everyone expected them to

stay that way; big deficits only arose as a result of the crisis. The

crisis, which was a global phenomenon, was driven by runaway banks and

private debt, not government deficits. There was no urgency about

austerity: financial markets never showed any concern about British solvency. And Britain, which returned to growth only after a pause in the austerity drive, has made up none of the ground it lost during the coalition’s first two years."If we do not have economic recovery and voters start understanding just how false was the narrative on which austerity has been based then the Tories really will be punished in 2020.

[Molly Windley 76]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Its Character Forming"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]You''re looking for tories with empathy, Purple. Your search may not bear fruit.[/quote]Touché, BBB. I don''t begrudge the Tories a perod of triumphalism (the only purple in my household, Snoots, is my Fiorentina scarf) but I suspect when the dust has settled this victory may not seem so altogether a good thing. The word "pyrrhic" might even start to be used.If at the end of another five years of - increased - austerity  the economy has not recovered as promised and real people feel no better off then the election mantra of "Give us even more time to finish the job" will be met with derision.And if the Tories have been governing on their own, or with the occasional help of the Ulster Unionists, the blame will fall entirely on them. They won''t have the LibDems to take the fall for them (exactly as Angela Merkel, who knows a thing or two about coalitions, told Clegg would happen back in 2010. A few decades will have to pass before the LibDems again prop up the Tories.Then there is the divisive question of what to do about Scotland. And the even more divisive question of a referedum on Europe. If, as has been reported, prospective Tory candidates had to pass an "Anti-EU" test to be selected then all hell will break loose.Not forgetting that Cameron has said he won''t serve a full term, which raises the prospect of even more Tory infighting between Boris and whoever.[/quote]

Some very good points. Personally disappointed for Ed Balls losing his seat. I think a key problem for him/ Milliband was not being able or willing to distance themselves from the over-spending of the last Labour government. I always thought he did a decent job as shadow chancellor but never overcame that problem.

The new Tory government reminds me of 1992 in lots of ways. That didn''t work out so well for them...[/quote]The problem was more the perception of overspending, carefully cultivated by the Tories, and linked to the great crash, As Paul Krugman explains in the New York Times, it was an election won on a false narrative:"It’s a story about Britain that runs like this: First, the Labour

government that ruled Britain until 2010 was wildly irresponsible,

spending far beyond its means. Second, this fiscal profligacy caused the

economic crisis of 2008-2009. Third, this in turn left the coalition

that took power in 2010 with no choice except to impose austerity

policies despite the depressed state of the economy. Finally, Britain’s

return to economic growth in 2013 vindicated austerity and proved its

critics wrong."Now, every piece of this story is demonstrably, ludicrously wrong. Pre-crisis Britain wasn''t fiscally profligate.

Debt and deficits were low, and at the time everyone expected them to

stay that way; big deficits only arose as a result of the crisis. The

crisis, which was a global phenomenon, was driven by runaway banks and

private debt, not government deficits. There was no urgency about

austerity: financial markets never showed any concern about British solvency. And Britain, which returned to growth only after a pause in the austerity drive, has made up none of the ground it lost during the coalition’s first two years."If we do not have economic recovery and voters start understanding just how false was the narrative on which austerity has been based then the Tories really will be punished in 2020.[/quote]

Pick your point of view and then pick your economist to back up that view.I have my own views on economists and typed " economists are useless" into Google and now I have, according to your view of what is demonstrable proof my own demonstrable proof that you are demonstrably incorrect.

[PurpleCanary 5,558]

[quote user="Molly Windley"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Its Character Forming"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]You''re looking for tories with empathy, Purple. Your search may not bear fruit.[/quote]Touché, BBB. I don''t begrudge the Tories a perod of triumphalism (the only purple in my household, Snoots, is my Fiorentina scarf) but I suspect when the dust has settled this victory may not seem so altogether a good thing. The word "pyrrhic" might even start to be used.If at the end of another five years of - increased - austerity  the economy has not recovered as promised and real people feel no better off then the election mantra of "Give us even more time to finish the job" will be met with derision.And if the Tories have been governing on their own, or with the occasional help of the Ulster Unionists, the blame will fall entirely on them. They won''t have the LibDems to take the fall for them (exactly as Angela Merkel, who knows a thing or two about coalitions, told Clegg would happen back in 2010. A few decades will have to pass before the LibDems again prop up the Tories.Then there is the divisive question of what to do about Scotland. And the even more divisive question of a referedum on Europe. If, as has been reported, prospective Tory candidates had to pass an "Anti-EU" test to be selected then all hell will break loose.Not forgetting that Cameron has said he won''t serve a full term, which raises the prospect of even more Tory infighting between Boris and whoever.[/quote]

Some very good points. Personally disappointed for Ed Balls losing his seat. I think a key problem for him/ Milliband was not being able or willing to distance themselves from the over-spending of the last Labour government. I always thought he did a decent job as shadow chancellor but never overcame that problem.

The new Tory government reminds me of 1992 in lots of ways. That didn''t work out so well for them...[/quote]The problem was more the perception of overspending, carefully cultivated by the Tories, and linked to the great crash, As Paul Krugman explains in the New York Times, it was an election won on a false narrative:"It’s a story about Britain that runs like this: First, the Labour

government that ruled Britain until 2010 was wildly irresponsible,

spending far beyond its means. Second, this fiscal profligacy caused the

economic crisis of 2008-2009. Third, this in turn left the coalition

that took power in 2010 with no choice except to impose austerity

policies despite the depressed state of the economy. Finally, Britain’s

return to economic growth in 2013 vindicated austerity and proved its

critics wrong."Now, every piece of this story is demonstrably, ludicrously wrong. Pre-crisis Britain wasn''t fiscally profligate.

Debt and deficits were low, and at the time everyone expected them to

stay that way; big deficits only arose as a result of the crisis. The

crisis, which was a global phenomenon, was driven by runaway banks and

private debt, not government deficits. There was no urgency about

austerity: financial markets never showed any concern about British solvency. And Britain, which returned to growth only after a pause in the austerity drive, has made up none of the ground it lost during the coalition’s first two years."If we do not have economic recovery and voters start understanding just how false was the narrative on which austerity has been based then the Tories really will be punished in 2020.[/quote]

Pick your point of view and then pick your economist to back up that view.I have my own views on economists and typed " economists are useless" into Google and now I have, according to your view of what is demonstrable proof my own demonstrable proof that you are demonstrably incorrect.[/quote]Except, Molly, that this particular economist is only saying what the totally independent Office for Budget Responsibility has said, and what the politically neutral senior UK economic civil servant, the permanant secretary to the Treasury, has said, that the crash was "a banking crisis pure and simple" and not caused by any supposed Labour overspending.

[quentin 0]

I''m sure Balls will bounce back [:D][:D][:D]

[Crafty Canary 495]

Purple, I didn''t say that BBB mentioned IDS. BBB is playing semantics over my observation that most people saw the Tories as being the best party to continue the progress of the country (most in terms of those that voted, those that didn''t have no right to complainIMO).

I used IDS as an example of how the Tories are helping the nation to get back on its feet. Shame you made 2+2=5. With accounting like that perhaps you should be shadow chancellor. :)

[Molly Windley 76]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Molly Windley"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Its Character Forming"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]You''re looking for tories with empathy, Purple. Your search may not bear fruit.[/quote]Touché, BBB. I don''t begrudge the Tories a perod of triumphalism (the only purple in my household, Snoots, is my Fiorentina scarf) but I suspect when the dust has settled this victory may not seem so altogether a good thing. The word "pyrrhic" might even start to be used.If at the end of another five years of - increased - austerity  the economy has not recovered as promised and real people feel no better off then the election mantra of "Give us even more time to finish the job" will be met with derision.And if the Tories have been governing on their own, or with the occasional help of the Ulster Unionists, the blame will fall entirely on them. They won''t have the LibDems to take the fall for them (exactly as Angela Merkel, who knows a thing or two about coalitions, told Clegg would happen back in 2010. A few decades will have to pass before the LibDems again prop up the Tories.Then there is the divisive question of what to do about Scotland. And the even more divisive question of a referedum on Europe. If, as has been reported, prospective Tory candidates had to pass an "Anti-EU" test to be selected then all hell will break loose.Not forgetting that Cameron has said he won''t serve a full term, which raises the prospect of even more Tory infighting between Boris and whoever.[/quote]

Some very good points. Personally disappointed for Ed Balls losing his seat. I think a key problem for him/ Milliband was not being able or willing to distance themselves from the over-spending of the last Labour government. I always thought he did a decent job as shadow chancellor but never overcame that problem.

The new Tory government reminds me of 1992 in lots of ways. That didn''t work out so well for them...[/quote]The problem was more the perception of overspending, carefully cultivated by the Tories, and linked to the great crash, As Paul Krugman explains in the New York Times, it was an election won on a false narrative:"It’s a story about Britain that runs like this: First, the Labour

government that ruled Britain until 2010 was wildly irresponsible,

spending far beyond its means. Second, this fiscal profligacy caused the

economic crisis of 2008-2009. Third, this in turn left the coalition

that took power in 2010 with no choice except to impose austerity

policies despite the depressed state of the economy. Finally, Britain’s

return to economic growth in 2013 vindicated austerity and proved its

critics wrong."Now, every piece of this story is demonstrably, ludicrously wrong. Pre-crisis Britain wasn''t fiscally profligate.

Debt and deficits were low, and at the time everyone expected them to

stay that way; big deficits only arose as a result of the crisis. The

crisis, which was a global phenomenon, was driven by runaway banks and

private debt, not government deficits. There was no urgency about

austerity: financial markets never showed any concern about British solvency. And Britain, which returned to growth only after a pause in the austerity drive, has made up none of the ground it lost during the coalition’s first two years."If we do not have economic recovery and voters start understanding just how false was the narrative on which austerity has been based then the Tories really will be punished in 2020.[/quote]

Pick your point of view and then pick your economist to back up that view.I have my own views on economists and typed " economists are useless" into Google and now I have, according to your view of what is demonstrable proof my own demonstrable proof that you are demonstrably incorrect.[/quote]Except, Molly, that this particular economist is only saying what the totally independent Office for Budget Responsibility has said, and what the politically neutral senior UK economic civil servant, the permanant secretary to the Treasury, has said, that the crash was "a banking crisis pure and simple" and not caused by any supposed Labour overspending.[/quote]No one is claiming that Labour caused the Global economic crisis/crash, well I hope that are not anyway.Its the claim that Labours spending prior to the crash was not profligate.Mr Brown was a King Cnut type figure declaring that the tides or boom and bust would no longer happen.  His plan to halt the tides was to spend and borrow to boom the economy and if the economy slowed he would simply spend and borrow more.Some economists would say that running an economy that way is reckless, profligate and inevitably doomed to long term failure and some will say its the perfect model of caution and prudence, its all opinions and not demonstrable facts.What I am objecting to is the offering up of one, two or even a group of economists opinions and saying they are demonstrable facts when they are just opinions.

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,023]

That any self respecting Norwich City fan could vote for anything blue is totally beyond me!!.......

[Katie Borkins 1]

Crafty, it is not semantics to say your use of "most people" is incorrect. It is a factual inaccuracy.