Life under the Tories: don't say you weren't warned

[beeswax]

Life under the Tories: don't say you weren't warned

 

The Tory nightmare: don't say you weren't warned | Ian Martin | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

 

As I sit here in a post-operative haze, with my waking hours rising strongly on the credit side, I was looking for something to send me off to the land of the eternal buzz saw when I came across mattx’s forum post.

Having worked in journalism I wondered if I could use some of my forensic skills on behalf of the Edugeek Community to “interpret” the piece, rather as an experienced ornithologist might “correct” a tyro bird watcher who swears they have seen a South American Buzzard by Lake Windermere, when what you are in fact looking at is a great tit.

On my first read through of the article I suspected the writer of being a comedian, and I’m afraid he rather gave the game away when towards the end of the piece he admits to being a member of not one, but two “comedy writing” unions. I suspect that bundling IT Support in with blogging and vajazzling (I’ll Google that later) was intended as a comedic thrust, rather than the faux pas it resulted in. It was good to see members here jump to the barricades to protest at this outrageous slur against the fine body of men and women who keep this country ticking over. It reminded me of the way shop stewards would pounce on any slight in order to restore the good name of his or her trade union members in the eyes of the public.

Looking more thoroughly at the offending article I noticed, almost hidden away at the top, the fact that this was referred to as “Comment Is Free”; for those unaware of the subtleties perpetrated by some of the more revolutionary “rags”, “Comment” is the writer’s personal view, whilst Editorial reflects the views of the paper in question. Some papers will naturally abuse this by making sure those invited to provide a comment piece already share the editorial line. I believe the Daily Mail already has a crack team of necromancers based in the Steppes, holding a dialogue with Attila the Hun on the effect of Ken Livingstone becoming Mayor of London on house prices.

I don’t think the piece is very good, Ian Martin has written better stuff, he might have been on a tight deadline. Who knows what obstacles he had to overcome to get this piece in on time? Don’t blame the Guardian, write your own comment piece, keep it below 1000 words and be prepared to drop it to 350. Instantly.

Edited March 27, 2012 by beeswax

[beeswax]

I keep asking this question but I'm yet to get a definitive answer: who the bloody hell do we owe all this money to? I keep hearing about the massive debt we're in but nobody seems to know who the debtor is!

 

This may be controversial, but with all these daft oil-grabbing wars we keep poking our noses in to, why don't we just refuse to pay them back and let them start a war with us? Of course I jest...

 

you might want to read this article - This disgraceful budget smacks of incompetence and cowardice | Will Hutton | Comment is free | The Observer , and in particular this para,

"Nor is it true that Britain has record public debts. It did have a record annual public deficit in 2009/10 as the budget papers say. But that is not debt. Debt is an aggregate figure, the consequence of cumulative deficits over decades. Expressed as a proportion of GDP, debt has been higher than current levels for most of the last 250 years. Indeed, with the cost of servicing public debt at the lowest since the 1890s there have been very few decades since the 1760s when the cost of servicing public debt has been so low. Britain, despite the Orwellian attempt to misuse language, does not have a debt crisis."

 

When I was on holiday in Italy last August I recall watching BBC World News, where there was an interview with William Hague (it was his turn to hold the fort that week) and he was asked about the deficit, to which his reply was pretty much along the lines of, "Keep calm, there's nothing to see here, we can easily handle this, we've had bigger deficits"

[Sirbendy]

We're paying £500+ a month for a 4 day week at Nursery for Isabel...when #2 comes along, after the first year maternity leave, we'll be paying near a grand a month on childcare. So, my wage gone instantly, effectively.

 

By that point, Izz will be 3 and a half, so start getting free hours...but still, eye watering.

[Flatpackhamster]

you might want to read this article - This disgraceful budget smacks of incompetence and cowardice | Will Hutton | Comment is free | The Observer , and in particular this para,

"Nor is it true that Britain has record public debts. It did have a record annual public deficit in 2009/10 as the budget papers say. But that is not debt. Debt is an aggregate figure, the consequence of cumulative deficits over decades. Expressed as a proportion of GDP, debt has been higher than current levels for most of the last 250 years. Indeed, with the cost of servicing public debt at the lowest since the 1890s there have been very few decades since the 1760s when the cost of servicing public debt has been so low. Britain, despite the Orwellian attempt to misuse language, does not have a debt crisis."

 

When I was on holiday in Italy last August I recall watching BBC World News, where there was an interview with William Hague (it was his turn to hold the fort that week) and he was asked about the deficit, to which his reply was pretty much along the lines of, "Keep calm, there's nothing to see here, we can easily handle this, we've had bigger deficits"

 

Sorry, but he's wrong, plain and simple. The cost of debt might be lower now, but the long-term liabilities of public sector pensions costs, state pension costs, bank bailouts and PFI put our debt to GDP ratio at around 400%.

[witch]

I love all this "It's the last Labour government's fault"

Anyone remember the Tory government BEFORE that?

Now that was a walk in the park......

 

(as for the cuts - stop cutting the wrong things and STOP giving money (other than to charities who work in the enviroment) to countries like India who can afford their own nuclear weapons and so are hardly poor.

There are many countries that are deserving of our help. India isn't one of them IMHO

That'll save a few quid)

[aerospacemango]

I love all this "It's the last Labour government's fault"

Anyone remember the Tory government BEFORE that?

Now that was a walk in the park......

 

(as for the cuts - stop cutting the wrong things and STOP giving money (other than to charities who work in the enviroment) to countries like India who can afford their own nuclear weapons and so are hardly poor.

There are many countries that are deserving of our help. India isn't one of them IMHO

That'll save a few quid)

 

EVERYONE seems to forgotten those shysters......

 

They ran the country into the ground for 18 years....it was always going to be tough for the next Labour government after that.

 

Of course, they (Labour) didn't help themselves towards the end.....

[teejay]

We've had bad governments all the way since the late 60's/early 70's, doesn't matter what flavour. The only common factor in that time is the power grab by the EU which has made our government pretty pointless anyway. We now either need to become the United States of Europe or leave the EU to sort the current mess out.

[Dos_Box]

EVERYONE seems to forgotten those shysters......

 

They ran the country into the ground for 18 years....it was always going to be tough for the next Labour government after that.

 

Of course, they (Labour) didn't help themselves towards the end.....

 

I could argue the point that the country was already in the ground when they took over in 79. Even the IMF had to bail us out in 76 and it was on the cards they wouldn't do it a second time.

The Conservatives are the nasty medicine we all have to take after several years partying with Labour. It doesn't mean what they do, or how they go about it it right, or even 'fair' (I hate that phrase being used by politicians), but the fact remains we (the UK as a country) couldn't go on as we have been doing since 1997. There was no money left. At all, and considering the only money politicians have is our money and they have a deficit it is to us they will come and claw more back from.

[localzuk]

The thing that annoys me about this is - if the governments of the world could all agree, by treaty, to put in place, say, a 0.5% financial transaction tax, we could basically get rid of income tax entirely... But no one country, or group of countries could do it without the agreement of all others. Otherwise, it'll just mean banks all move to countries without that charge.

[sted]

does bank money (other than wages) actually matter though its all made up paper money that in theory means something but is actually worthless?

[jinnantonnixx]

Money itself is worthless; it's a notion.

 

Interestingly, it started out with early bankers who issued receipts for gold deposits. People started trading these receipts instead of the gold (or whatever else was deposited), and money started. The most amazing thing followed, whereby the bankers issued more money than they had in the safe, fueled by the demand for credit. As long as there was no "run" on the bank, this worked and is still working today.

 

 

 

 

We trust money as a unit of commodity; we all subscribe to the notion that it has value.

it's a representation of debt.

 

If money vanished, society could not function. If we vanished, money would simply vanish as it has no meaning outside of us.

Edited March 28, 2012 by jinnantonnixx

[Guest Guest]

EVERYONE seems to forgotten those shysters......

 

They ran the country into the ground for 18 years....it was always going to be tough for the next Labour government after that.

 

Of course, they (Labour) didn't help themselves towards the end.....

 

Have a talk with 95% of people in the North who lived through the 80s, believe me when I say they haven't forgotten and I doubt very much they ever will. The look of overwhelming glee when people heard that Thatcher was ill...

 

Only the other day my mate said the propergander quote passed down through the generations of "those bloody Tories". When I asked him why he didn't actually know why and resorted back to "in the 80s..." - neither of us are old enough to remember the 80s!

[LeMarchand]

The Conservatives are the nasty medicine we all have to take after several years partying with Labour.

 

I wouldn't mind the nasty medicine so much if I'd been invited to this party that people keep talking about. In terms of my personal finances, things were pretty poor under Labour (with a slight improvement at the end when lower interest = lower mortgage). Under the Tories, things are going from bad to much, much worse; I'm now just waiting until they open the Poor Houses again.

 

My personal take:

 

Did Labour fumble the ball when they had it? Hell yes! Are some of them crooks? Of course! (I'm looking at you, Tory B. Liar). However, as a Party they seem to want to do some good for the "average" person, even if they do make a hash of it. On the other hand the Tories seem dedicated to creating a ruling elite with the rest of us knocked back to serf status.

[teejay]

Have a talk with 95% of people in the North who lived through the 80s, believe me when I say they haven't forgotten and I doubt very much they ever will. The look of overwhelming glee when people heard that Thatcher was ill...

 

Only the other day my mate said the propergander quote passed down through the generations of "those bloody Tories". When I asked him why he didn't actually know why and resorted back to "in the 80s..." - neither of us are old enough to remember the 80s!

 

That's the problem, it's gone down in folklore that Thatcher was an evil b:censored:, but there was a lot more to it than that. Yes, parts of manufacturing and traditional industries were destroyed, but the blame for that isn't just in the governments court. You also need to look at the union barons who were up for a fight whatever the consequences, the management of the companies who weren't really flexible enough in dealing with globalisation and also the start of EU meddling (all the sell off of nationalised industries was down to the EU, loads more as well such as VAT increases). Was the country in a better position after 18 years of Conservative government, then yes it was, but with a lot of pain and damage along the way, a lot of which could've been avoided.

[broc]

If the Country was better off after 18 years of Thatcherite Tory rule, why did the electorate kick them out?

 

You can ask the same question after New Labours reign came to an end.....

 

One thing that cannot be disputed; we are all governed now by a Government that nobody voted for......

 

The Conservatives 'conned' the Lib Dems into a coalition, Nick Clegg was so desperate for a taste of power he sold out his party........

 

Meanwhile New Labour were probably relieved to have lost, because it was an election that nobody could win convincingly.

 

We are run by a millionaires club now. The party of self-interest rules, with lib-dems increasingly embarrassed by their leaders, meanwhile not so New Labour sits on the sidelines feeling sorry for itself.

[localzuk]

If the Country was better off after 18 years of Thatcherite Tory rule, why did the electorate kick them out?

 

Because John Major was a wet blanket? Combined with people thinking that Labour saying 'we'll spend spend spend!!!' was a good thing?

[LosOjos]

One thing that cannot be disputed; we are all governed now by a Government that nobody voted for......

 

This point!

 

It infuriates me every time I think about it; in what kind of a democracy do the people get a government that not only weren't voted for but in fact didn't exist as a candidate! Of course it's obvious that we have a Tory government whatever spin they put on it, but they did not win the vote and should not be in power. Then of course there's the fact the House of Lords have final say on any laws being passed (over ride any votes) and the EU have their say too... so tell me, just what is my vote worth?

[LeMarchand]

Because John Major was a wet blanket? Combined with people thinking that Labour saying 'we'll spend spend spend!!!' was a good thing?

 

I don't think it was that. I can remember friends telling me that they were watching in groups that cheered every time a Tory seat fell. Now, I may have more left-leaning friends, but there are similar tales from across the country - including the sort of people who would normally be assumed to be Tory supporters. I don't remember hearing about an equivalent almost universal reaction at the last election.

 

Unfortunately a combination of Labour getting it badly wrong, short voter memories, and the lack of any real choice in who to vote for has lead to another Tory Emperor.

[aerospacemango]

This point!

 

It infuriates me every time I think about it; in what kind of a democracy do the people get a government that not only weren't voted for but in fact didn't exist as a candidate! Of course it's obvious that we have a Tory government whatever spin they put on it, but they did not win the vote and should not be in power. Then of course there's the fact the House of Lords have final say on any laws being passed (over ride any votes) and the EU have their say too... so tell me, just what is my vote worth?

 

At what point, in the future, will they put an "Abstention" on the voting form? Make it compulsory to vote and then see what the score is?

 

I'm guessing that we may get a different view of elections if that was allowed to happen....

[LeMarchand]

At what point, in the future, will they put an "Abstention" on the voting form? Make it compulsory to vote and then see what the score is?

 

Never. If they did, politicians might have to actually listen to the people they are paid to represent.

[teejay]

 

One thing that cannot be disputed; we are all governed now by a Government that nobody voted for......

 

 

Actually, we did. The party with the most votes and seats won were the Conservatives, the Lib Dems stated quite categorically before the election that in the event of a hung parliament they would attempt to form a coalition with the party with the biggest mandate, which they did.

[teejay]

At what point, in the future, will they put an "Abstention" on the voting form? Make it compulsory to vote and then see what the score is?

 

I'm guessing that we may get a different view of elections if that was allowed to happen....

 

Totally agree, but the 'Abstention' should be 'None of the Above' and if 'None of the Above' wins then there should be a re-election in that constituency none of the previous candidates able to stand.

[Gibbo]

If the Country was better off after 18 years of Thatcherite Tory rule, why did the electorate kick them out?

 

The economy was good but it was scandal after scandal with the Tories at the time. Barely a week went by without some extra marital affair or cash for questions and whatnot.

 

And the whole regime was tired and stale, the country was ready for a change. The Tories needed time in opposition to re brand and change. And for a time it was a change of good. But then the honeymoon period ended.

 

But there is an issue with certain people having problems with their political memories. They see Thatcher as the ultimate evil who stole milk (yet Labour did it first, funny how nobody remembers that). They also remember the miners strike, but don't remember the problem about UK coal being too sulphurous, and quickly forgot how Brown was one of the most disliked PMs in recent times, ID cards, PFIs and BSF and so on.

[broc]

it was scandal after scandal with the Tories at the time. Barely a week went by without some extra marital affair or cash for questions and whatnot.

 

 

Same old Tories then? It didn't take them long to get back to their old tricks.......

[Dos_Box]

Same old Tories then? It didn't take them long to get back to their old tricks.......

 

Let he who casts the first stone etc: BBC News | UK POLITICS | Pressure mounts over Ecclestone cash

 

What you have to remember is that business, particuarly big business will support whoever it thinks is going to get in power next. You can go back theough the BBC news site and see exactly teh same thing going on between all the parties. When the Conservatives were voted out in 97 one of the primary reasons was because there was personal scandal after personal scandal (and the fact that they had stagnated as a ruling party which happens to all of them in the end), where as when Labour were voted out it was becoming political scandal after political scandal (and stagnation).