The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[Eggs]

....the Tory's appear to making policy on the hoof. The Labour tactic of highlighting that Conservatives are the party of the rich appears to be having an impact in late giveaway's. The problem with policy on the hoof is that it doesn't appear to have been thought through and costed.

It's going to be very close but it looks (to me) that the Tory's are chasing rather than leading the debate.

 

[The Mighty Quint]

Right to buy happened 33 years ago. How long were Labour in power to build additional homes ? We have a housing crisis because the population has grown and been imported..........It is reported that there are currently 10 empty homes for every homeless family............if anyone was really serious about this it could be sorted.........

I was very young at the time, but looking back now, even I can see it was absolute madness to sell off all the social housing and then for Thatcher to state absolutely that none of the funds from the sales could be reinvested into more housing.

Just another case of the Tories selling off state assets to prop up their time in power, sold the utilities, sold all the housing and we the public will be paying for those travesties forever more.

 

[roydo]

I was very young at the time

I wasnt. And a lot of those assets were dying on their feet.

Didnt agree with the housing sell offs and retention of the cash though. Was barmy that. Should have been ploughed back to replace the ones sold.

 

[The Mighty Quint]

I wasnt. And a lot of those assets were dying on their feet.

Didnt agree with the housing sell offs and retention of the cash though. Was barmy that. Should have been ploughed back to replace the ones sold.

Bt that was the problem wasn't it, to not rebuild and replenish the stock of housing for future generations was madness, and it's very clear why it was done, to spend the money elsewhere to make the Tory's look like they were doing a good job, just like when the sold off the Gas, Electric, BT, Water etc.

Disgraceful the way they screwed us all back then, like I say, paying for it forever more, those utilities should still be state owned, turning profits that would be invested into the countries infrastructure, imagine all we could do now with those profits, absolutely destroyed this country in the 80's did the Tory's, we will never recover.

 

[roydo]

Bt that was the problem wasn't it, to not rebuild and replenish the stock of housing for future generations was madness, and it's very clear why it was done, to spend the money elsewhere to make the Tory's look like they were doing a good job, just like when the sold off the Gas, Electric, BT, Water etc.

Disgraceful the way they screwed us all back then, like I say, paying for it forever more, those utilities should still be state owned, turning profits that would be invested into the countries infrastructure, imagine all we could do now with those profits, absolutely destroyed this country in the 80's did the Tory's, we will never recover.

Not going to bother with a history lesson mate. But it wasnt like that back then.

And if you really reckon that the then GPO, (Phones basically) could ever have delivered the broad band/mobile infrastructure we have now, (for just one example) when the reality back then was it took weeks, yes, weeks, to get sent a phone to connect to your landline when you moved house. Well, it wouldnt have happened.

And as for then nationlised industries making a profit? Ok mate.

 

[Jib in lad]

Bt that was the problem wasn't it, to not rebuild and replenish the stock of housing for future generations was madness, and it's very clear why it was done, to spend the money elsewhere to make the Tory's look like they were doing a good job, just like when the sold off the Gas, Electric, BT, Water etc.

Disgraceful the way they screwed us all back then, like I say, paying for it forever more, those utilities should still be state owned, turning profits that would be invested into the countries infrastructure, imagine all we could do now with those profits, absolutely destroyed this country in the 80's did the Tory's, we will never recover.

Lets not forget the oil windfall of the 80s as well.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...rth-sea-oil-–-failure-invest-britain’s-future

 

[Joey66]

I wasnt. And a lot of those assets were dying on their feet.

Didnt agree with the housing sell offs and retention of the cash though. Was barmy that. Should have been ploughed back to replace the ones sold.

As soon as Thatcher sold them off she cancelled all council house building straight away - We are still 1.5 million short of council houses the Tories are also stating to fund the the housing association right to buy house by selling 15 0000 Council houses - what happened to the big society ??? If you are waiting on the council house list tough luck!

 

[The Mighty Quint]

Lets not forget the oil windfall of the 80s as well.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/04/thatcher-and-north-sea-oil-–-failure-invest-britain’s-future

They absolutely screwed the country forever more, you can not fail to turn a profit selling necessary services to the general public.

They just done the same with Royal Mail, Royal mail was fine, I spend upto £200 a week with them, I know the state of their services, they were fine, best value, great reliable delivery services.

But the Tory's told us they needed massive investment to compete with other couriers and had to be sold, utter utter bullshit and they got away with it again.

When it was sold it was turning a profit of nearly half a billion a year.

 

[Joey66]

They absolutely screwed the country forever more, you can not fail to turn a profit selling necessary services to the general public.

They just done the same with Royal Mail, Royal mail was fine, I spend upto £200 a week with them, I know the state of their services, they were fine, best value, great reliable delivery services.

But the Tory's told us they needed massive investment to compete with other couriers and had to be sold, utter utter bullshit and they got away with it again.

When it was sold it was turning a profit of nearly half a billion a year.

Yes our postal rates are increased again utter joke of a cheap sell off just like selling off BT and the railways!
When they sold BT conservative MP Norman on your bike Tebbit became chairman as shares soared - the nasty unfounded Tories are getting desperate today imo!

 

[roydo]

As soon as Thatcher sold them off she cancelled all council house building straight away - We are still 1.5 million short of council houses the Tories are also stating to fund the the housing association right to buy house by selling 15 0000 Council houses - what happened to the big society ??? If you are waiting on the council house list tough luck!

Without digging out tons of posts, the housing situation we have can be laid at the feet of both Tory and Labour for decades. Neither have addressed the central issue because it would be too unpopular.

It has been a mess for decades.

 

[The Mighty Quint]

Not going to bother with a history lesson mate. But it wasnt like that back then.

And if you really reckon that the then GPO, (Phones basically) could ever have delivered the broad band/mobile infrastructure we have now, (for just one example) when the reality back then was it took weeks, yes, weeks, to get sent a phone to connect to your landline when you moved house. Well, it wouldnt have happened.

And as for then nationlised industries making a profit? Ok mate.

They were poorly run, no reason they could not have stayed in state ownership and turned around to what they are today, you can not fail to turn a profit selling Utilities to the general public, they make billions and billions a year now for shareholders.

 

[roydo]

They were poorly run, no reason they could not have stayed in state ownership and turned around to what they are today, you can not fail to turn a profit selling Utilities to the general public, they make billions and billions a year now for shareholders.

But thats the point mate. At the time they were is such a dire state, well, some were, that turning them into a profit centre as state owned was nigh on impossible.

The unions in some were all controlling, nothing could be done that would need to be done without their say so, and that was never going to happen. They had already bought down two governments, to no ones benefit other than to appease their own political dogma, and the country was knackered.

It was a different age mate, honestly, and some do not realise what a barn pot we were back then.

Your point about making a profit, for example, would never ever would have been even suggested back then. Profit was never even mentioned.

 

[Joey66]

Without digging out tons of posts, the housing situation we have can be laid at the feet of both Tory and Labour for decades. Neither have addressed the central issue because it would be too unpopular.

It has been a mess for decades.

I agree that's why New Labour under Blair was a watered down Tory party - That's why ED Millaband won v David Millaband in leadership contest as DM wanted to carry on down the Blair route, as for nationalised industries the Government of any period sold the family silver off its like you selling your house, and living in a tent = great economics! Instead of the greedy shareholders grabbing the profit the Government could have used the funds to pay off the debts , not possible if you sell the family silver is it?

 

[Clint Planet]

Even the Torygraph are saying the right to buy policy is madness.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...conomically-illiterate-and-morally-wrong.html

Are you really for it, @Bruce Wayne?

 

[Jxg]

I don't like Ed Balls as a person for reasons unrelated to the economy. However, I don't see how you can just argue that Balls isn't as smart as Osborne, or how Balls is out of his depth dealing with the economy, what are you backing this up with?

Ed Balls has all the credentials of Osborne (and arguably more). He has a first class degree in PPE from Oxford followed by a scholarship in economics at Harvard which is very prestigious and has rigorous mental testing and has been awarded to very few people. He was also the lead economic writer for the financial times.

You can say a lot about the man, but his credentials as an economist are exceptional by anyone's standards and he is far from lacking the requisite intellect.

This posted yet?

Look, I'm all for his credentials but as for intellect, if you're going to completely contradict yourself less than three months later, you're lacking in that department.