Ed Balls wearing a Norwich scarf today

[nutty nigel 7,968]

I reckon labour are to the right of left for sure. And the tories to the left of right. But if you think back to the days of Thatcher and Foot for both it was the other way around and there was a huge gap between the parties. A gap so big that the gang of three could put  their party (social dems was it?) between the two partiies and for a time it seemed like they could be succesful. Since those days we''ve never had an extreme government. New labour has little in common with old labour. New tories, although I don''t think they ever took that name, are nothing like Thatcher''s tories. Now there''d be no room for the gang of three. Only room is out on the wings where you do get extremists but they will never be in a position to be a threat.

 

[Downloads 35]

I said at the time - Best thing that ever happened to the Tories was David Miliband losing. Anyone who has witnessed him debate would know Cameron wouldn''t have stood a chance. As it is, I think the next election will be a Tory walkover unless something leftfield happens. I think over the next couple of years things will pick up very, very slowly (Not this year) and people won''t risk change near the election.

[Downloads 35]

Completely agree Nigel, its always the safe vote now.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

I reckon labour are to the right of left for sure. And the tories to the left of right. But if you think back to the days of Thatcher and Foot for both it was the other way around and there was a huge gap between the parties. A gap so big that the gang of three could put  their party (social dems was it?) between the two partiies and for a time it seemed like they could be succesful. Since those days we''ve never had an extreme government. New labour has little in common with old labour. New tories, although I don''t think they ever took that name, are nothing like Thatcher''s tories. Now there''d be no room for the gang of three. Only room is out on the wings where you do get extremists but they will never be in a position to be a threat.

 

[/quote]The coalition is left of right but the current Tory party is firmly on the right despite the flowery noises on superficial subjects. Not to say there is nothing to the right of them but even under Thatcher they weren''t quite Nazis!Labor is heading back to the left (but has a long way to move before it gets back to Foot''s times to be sure!)

[nutty nigel 7,968]

Many traditional labour activists didn''t recognise new labour as the same party. New labour did what they had to do in order to get back into government. But whilst they were in power for a long time they didn''t really shift much further back to the left. The tories have had to do the same to get back in. In fact they''ve had to form a coalition. But if they remain in power with a better majority don''t expect them to stay centre. They will ditch their new allies and take the party further right.

 

 

[kick it off 2,063]

I agree with above points regarding centrist politics having taken over. I think the biggest losers are the Libs, I see the election going to Labour under certain circumstances, I see it going Tories under certain circumstances.

The one certainty I have is I don''t see any scenario where the Libs will be kingmakers again, I can only see a majority one way or the other - The Libs have condemned themselves to several more decades of being a truly marginal party due to Clegg''s spineless leadership. Gladstone would be spinning in his grave to see what his principles have been warped in to.

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="kick it off"]Funnily enough, you''ve misssed the target again, I''m a mature student, I''m not some snotty nosed teenager, I have already been out there paying tax and bills. I''ve also lived in Turkey and taught at the largest private school in Europe (although it''s technically in Asia), spent time in the Gambia with various development projects and governmental agencies, and done a placement in the UN European HQ in Geneva.

You''ll find the real world a very different place if you choose to open your eyes. Being a conservative appeals to those who are already doing well in life, and don''t give a toss about the rest of society (no offence meant, I''m just laying my views out in simplistic terms to save writing an essay!). As to Tories being those who choose to stand alone, shall we do a survey on how many Tory donors have earnt their living through hard work and "endeavour" and how many come from old money? It is a myth perpetuated by the party that they believe in meritocracy when in reality all they care about is maintaining the status quo and ensuring the already rich stay that way and opportunities for social mobility are hamstrung for everyone else.[/quote]The very rich get far richer under Labour governments than they do under Tory governments.The problem we are in now is that the governments of the world have overspent so much that it''s likely they will be forced to live within their budgets for generations to come. That means that many government spending cuts will be permanent and Labour will have to totally reassess how they run the country as their policies are always based on over spending.

[Canaries Utd 0]

The guy was born in Bawburgh, he moved out of the county soon after primary school, but has continued to support Norwich throughout his schooling and career,  its a nice thing to see [:D] 

[Lord Horn 0]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]

[quote user="Lord Horn"]
No, I think you''ll find that he/she''s got half a brain cell....unlike some on here!
[/quote]

As a matter of interest M''Lud is yours a life peerage and if so who bestowed it upon you?[:P]

[/quote]

Funnily enough Tilly my name was put forward by Sir Les Patterson, erstwhile contemporary and inebriate.  Obviously a life peerage as when I''m dead I won''t be able to enjoy the benefits.  [:)]

[. 0]

[quote user="kick it off"]Downloads: As I have said previously, I don''t support alot of what Labour have done, they are nothing more than the best of a bad bunch imo. I am 100% with you that work should pay, you wan''t find anything but agreement from me for that sentiment - but punishing cancer sufferers by cutting their benefits after 1 year, is amongst various odious policies the Tories use to punish the poor and vulnerable.

When I work? See above....

I''m sorry about your neighbours but they are hardly a representative sample, I know loads of Labour voters, both employed and unemployed - those unemployed want to work, but there are no jobs because Osborne hasn''t got a clue on how to repair the economy. The Tories will blame it all on Labour for as long as they can, but it''s a tired old rhetoric.

Yes mistakes were made by Labour economically, but there was a global financial crash and billions of pounds wasted by bankers greed and lack of accountability. The Tories have had almost 2 years now, and they have made the situation worse by their actions (and no, before the Tory broken record starts I do not support borrowing our way out of it). I am certainly no economist but you cannot cut so heavily and create jobs in the private sector whilst doing absolutely nothing to incentivise growth. The Tories need to start facing up to their own actions and the fiscal consequences of them, instead of trying to pin it all on Labour.

Funnily enough, I hope nothing does make you sick, as with our newly privatised health service, and Cameron intent not to help the sick/disabled/vulnerable, the sick will soon be dying on our streets as if we were Elizabethans.[/quote]Dear oh dear......Perhaps as your name suggests you spend too much time behind a computer screen and not out in the real world. Sadly it''s clear already that you will amount to nothing in life and will instead will go forward carrying bitterness about anyone who does.Why should anyone through their own hard work and endeavour provide an income for whining individuals like you?

[a1canary 0]

Wow - you really are, to quote Steve Coogan, "a risible individual."

Where do you get off talking to people like that? Oh, hang on, you probably do get off on talking to people like that.

I''m just glad our future is in the hands of the younger generation like him (or her) who may still be learning but who already have a far wider, considered and more empathetic outlook. I''m just glad that you dinosaurs with your outmoded prehistoric rhetoric are very definitely not part of the future and of the world my children will grow up in. Thank f***!

[kick it off 2,063]

A Purist - I''m not sure how "Kick it off" means I spend too much time behind a computer screen but whatever.

I don''t need anyone to provide for me, I have never claimed any benefit of any kind in my entire life so yet again u try and pin something on me and totally miss the mark.

I think it''s pretty clear I will amount to something, and I''m not the bitter, whining individual here. That would be you whinging about how Labour ruined everything and anyone who supports Labour is claiming benefits and this that and the other. You just spout the same old rhetoric we hear from Cameron week in week out, and you clearly aren''t intelligent enough to actually challenge that, but that''s fine, some people just weren''t born with analytic brains and don''t have the capacity to see past what they read in the Daily Mail.

I''m not bitter toward anyone who does well for themselves, I''m from a very middle class background - In fact I''m just as bitter toward scroungers as you are - however I can make a distinction between scroungers and vulnerable, whereas you competence clearly stretches only so far as sweeping generalisations based in an incredibly weak foundation of "fact".

[Kirby_86 0]

Not too sure who this "A. Purist" character is but thank god i don''t know of them.This is the first time in ages i have logged onto this message board and it''s people like this smug,patronising and frankly rude individual who have previously put me off this messageboard.For sure have political views and for sure disagree with everything or agee with everything someone says but to be that patronising and to make sweeping generalisations makes the mentioned poster look a unpleasant individual.

[. 0]

The truth is seldom easy to swallow.......

[canarydan23 4,838]

More to the point, why are there Tory voters posting here? This is a Football forum for Football fans. Isn''t there some Rugby you can follow? Leave Football to the underpaid, overworked, exploited classes.

We have to put up with you swanning round our offices and factories in your expensive suits, paid for by our labour, we don''t want to have to see you at our football stadiums as well.

[Kirby_86 0]

Say what you think the truth is by all means,but you come across as a total moron and a rude person.

[Kirby_86 0]

[quote user="canarydan23"]More to the point, why are there Tory voters posting here? This is a Football forum for Football fans. Isn''t there some Rugby you can follow? Leave Football to the underpaid, overworked, exploited classes.

We have to put up with you swanning round our offices and factories in your expensive suits, paid for by our labour, we don''t want to have to see you at our football stadiums as well.[/quote]   

So much truth spoken,although A Purist wouldn''t understand a word of this as his tongue is so far lodged up the backside of the elitists and the self centred who don''t understand and deny there is a class system.The working classes are the foundations and grafters of this country and always will be.

[. 0]

I aim to please.... [Y]

[Kirby_86 0]

Serious question...do you believe in social mobility or do you believe in elitism and a natural order?

[ron obvious 1,735]

[quote user="Kirby_86"]

[quote user="canarydan23"]More to the point, why are there Tory voters posting here? This is a Football forum for Football fans. Isn''t there some Rugby you can follow? Leave Football to the underpaid, overworked, exploited classes.

We have to put up with you swanning round our offices and factories in your expensive suits, paid for by our labour, we don''t want to have to see you at our football stadiums as well.[/quote]   

So much truth spoken,although A Purist wouldn''t understand a word of this as his tongue is so far lodged up the backside of the elitists and the self centred who don''t understand and deny there is a class system.The working classes are the foundations and grafters of this country and always will be.

[/quote]

But why are there Labour voters posting on here? Just as valid.

There is a "class system", as there is in just about every country in the world. It''s a natural human instinct to want the best for you & your family; in a successful society there are institutions to ameliorate this tendency & maximize everyone''s opportunity for advancement.

Elites are inevitable - otherwise you wouldn''t have professional football. Some people simply have more ability than others. How we regard & reward those elites is another matter.

The Labour party has long since ceased to represent the "working" classes Unfortunately, one of the inevitable consequences of democracy is buying votes. This applies to all parties. The previous government took this to its logical conclusion, borrowing ever more on the grounds that it had found a new economic paradigm. No More Boom & Bust. Hmm.

How much is a Prem. ticket these days? Before you bemoan the lot of the underpaid, overworked, exploited classes in this country, it might be worth doing some international comparisons. When I was 18, 40-odd years ago, it struck me as peculiar that Unions were shouting for hefty wage increases while a lot of the world was in poverty. Unsustainable, I thought, & still do.

[a1canary 0]

Can''t argue with much of that Ron. Political donations, from individuals at the very least should be banned, period. Shame this issue, on the rare occasions it does come up, usually around elections, is quickly brushed aside again.

Successive governments of BOTH colours have encouraged and rewarded elitism, Thatcher''s first and foremost, Blair and Brown later, thinking they could keep the elites happy AND be a friend of the working classes. It worked. Briefly.

In the end, all they succeeded in doing was making the elites very happy indeed, while chucking a few tit bits at the rest. Result? One of the most unequal societies in the western world with the wealth of the top 5th being further away from that of the bottom 5th than in pretty much any developed economy you care to mention.

[canarydan23 4,838]

40 odd years ago you thought it was peculiar that Unions were shouting for hefty wage increase while a lot of the world was in poverty?!

You thought that peculiar? You didn''t think it was odd that there were (are) people with enough personal wealth to eradicate poverty from whole starving towns, but rather than even considering that, they spend their days looking at ways to increase their assets from an amount they could never spend in a lifetime anyway to another superior amount that they could never spend in a lifetime anyway.

No, that''s fine, they''ve worked hard for that. But the people representing low-paid workers struggling to provide the types of lives they want for their familiy, it is "peculiar" for them to be shouting for wage increases?

Capitalism warps logic.

[PurpleCanary 6,470]

[quote user="ron obvious"]

 

But why are there Labour voters posting on here? Just as valid. There is a "class system", as there is in just about every country in the world. It''s a natural human instinct to want the best for you & your family; in a successful society there are institutions to ameliorate this tendency & maximize everyone''s opportunity for advancement. Elites are inevitable - otherwise you wouldn''t have professional football. Some people simply have more ability than others. How we regard & reward those elites is another matter. The Labour party has long since ceased to represent the "working" classes Unfortunately, one of the inevitable consequences of democracy is buying votes. This applies to all parties. The previous government took this to its logical conclusion, borrowing ever more on the grounds that it had found a new economic paradigm. No More Boom & Bust. Hmm. How much is a Prem. ticket these days? Before you bemoan the lot of the underpaid, overworked, exploited classes in this country, it might be worth doing some international comparisons. When I was 18, 40-odd years ago, it struck me as peculiar that Unions were shouting for hefty wage increases while a lot of the world was in poverty. Unsustainable, I thought, & still do.[/quote]

 

But that is a question - do we still have those institutions and policies to give everyone a chance? There was a post-world war two consensus in western Europe which was essentially social democratic. You had capitalism, but you acknowledged its inherent unfairnesses and legislated accordingly. This was followed just as much by right-wing governments (in Germany, for example) as by "socialist" ones.

 

That consensus got economically challenged back in the 1970s and afterwards by oil price shocks and ideologically challenged by such as Reagan and Thatcher. It is perhaps too easy to quote "There is no such thing as society" but it did articulate a view that people either didn''t or shouildn''t need any help. Since anyone could go from a log cabin to the White House, or become a millionaire, then in theory everyone could. Nonsense, of course, in practice.

 

[a1canary 0]

But that''s the American Dream purple, surely it must be more than just a lottery ticket?!

[. 0]

[quote user="Kirby_86"]Serious question...do you believe in social mobility or do you believe in elitism and a natural order?[/quote]I believe that as in nature the strong will survive and prosper while the weak will be left with the pickings. That''s how it is and how it always will be.... no matter how much the Labour nanny state may try to change things. There are winners and losers throughout the animal world and fundamentally that''s all we are... animals.To say the Tories don''t care is a nonsense. The genuinely sick and disabled could be properly cared for but the wasters swinging the lead and draining the tax payer. None of us minds helping the needy... but people too fat to work?  We could all do that sat on our arses watching television all day.I say good luck to anyone who''s got more than me... and tough luck for anyone who''s got less. Like all Conservatives I will help anyone trying to make a go of things in life, but those who want hand outs for no return deserve everything they get I''m afraid.

[Ruddygore 0]

Silly man.

[ron obvious 1,735]

[quote user="canarydan23"]40 odd years ago you thought it was peculiar that Unions were shouting for hefty wage increase while a lot of the world was in poverty?!

You thought that peculiar? You didn''t think it was odd that there were (are) people with enough personal wealth to eradicate poverty from whole starving towns, but rather than even considering that, they spend their days looking at ways to increase their assets from an amount they could never spend in a lifetime anyway to another superior amount that they could never spend in a lifetime anyway.

No, that''s fine, they''ve worked hard for that. But the people representing low-paid workers struggling to provide the types of lives they want for their familiy, it is "peculiar" for them to be shouting for wage increases?

Capitalism warps logic.[/quote]

My point was that the logic of the situation meant that, with a large proportion of the globe prepared to work for a pittance, we were going to be undercut & our standard of living was necessarily going to fall. It''s not my generation that''s paying for this, but the present one.

I''ve worked in a fair few places, come across all different sorts of people, & I''m afraid the types of lives they want for themselves & their families are frequently unrealistic. When I was 18 the assumption was you got a pay rise because ... well, because you wanted one & you could. Nothing to do with any increased effort on your behalf.

I don''t think people with vast personal wealth are that different to the rest of us. Is, say, Russell Martin expected to donate most of his personal wealth to eradicating poverty in a village in Africa? But he is vastly wealthier than most of us. So is he behaving oddly? And if he did, how would he achieve this? How do you deal with the corruption & internal politics? Many governments use starvation to control the population. So, should we invade them then?

It''s a difficult, complicated world. Changing it for the better is not simple or easy. The Law of Unintended Consequences is difficult to overcome.

Monty Python nailed it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLkhx0eqK5w

[kick it off 2,063]

Good posts Ron.

A Purist may see him/herself as part of the animal kingdom but unfortunately missed neanderthal times by 30 odd thousand years. In the modern age, we have something called civilisation and humanity.

Do you think we should do nothing to help the starving around the globe? Or the millions of children who die each year because they don''t have facilities for clean water? I''ll let you in to a little secret, most of them are dying because of our greed in the West and a history riddled with colonialism and exploitation.

Frankly I respect those people who do well for themselves but still maintain their sense of empathy and humanity (there are several of them, Bill Gates for one) far more than creatures like you.

[ron obvious 1,735]

[quote user="kick it off"]Good posts Ron.

A Purist may see him/herself as part of the animal kingdom but unfortunately missed neanderthal times by 30 odd thousand years. In the modern age, we have something called civilisation and humanity.

Do you think we should do nothing to help the starving around the globe? Or the millions of children who die each year because they don''t have facilities for clean water? I''ll let you in to a little secret, most of them are dying because of our greed in the West and a history riddled with colonialism and exploitation.

Frankly I respect those people who do well for themselves but still maintain their sense of empathy and humanity (there are several of them, Bill Gates for one) far more than creatures like you.[/quote]

I''d be interested to know why you get the opinion that I am lacking in empathy, or am a "creature" as opposed to a human being

My first realisation of the horrors going on in the world was when pictures of starving children came out of Biafra. My parents couldn''t understand why I''d suddenly lost my appetite. I regained it - or I wouldn''t be here - but their faces still watch me.

My own children were small when the Ethiopian famine occurred. I banged my head & fists against the wall, because every child was my child.

I reckon I frightened a few people when I went round collecting money for the appeal. They all gave, though. Many seemed as upset as I was, & a lot were very generous.

So, as I say, how are you going to implement the necessary changes in those countries? Force the governments to act in the way that you, I, & 90% of the population would like? I''d seriously like to know.

So I''ll give you some advice in exchange for your little secret. Don''t go round making fatuous assumptions about other people''s attitudes just because they don''t have the same simplistic views as you.

From a creature.

[Ruddygore 0]

I may be guessing but I felt that KIO was addressing that part of his/her comments towards the poster currently known as "A Purist" but forgot to make it clear.