Poll: Which party will get your vote in the General Election?

Which party will get your vote in the General Election?

  • Conservative

    Votes: 704 38.5%

  • Labour

    Votes: 221 12.1%

  • Liberal Democrat

    Votes: 297 16.2%

  • British National Party

    Votes: 144 7.9%

  • Green Party

    Votes: 36 2.0%

  • UK Independence Party

    Votes: 46 2.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 48 2.6%

  • Don't care I have no intension of voting.

    Votes: 334 18.3%
  • Total voters
    1,830
Status
Not open for further replies.
BTW Tell me if you ever choose to reveal your 'Sneaky secret you refuse to say' about what economic marker we should all be using then according to you? Remember -- the one you used to base your

Quote:
If we are going to look back on history ... you'll see that Labour historically perform worse economically than any Tory government.
Click to expand...
statement on (presuming you didn't just make the statement up)?


Or perhaps it's best if we all forgot you said it at all ... as maybe you've .. er .. 'forgotten' where you got this information from. Is 'forgotten' a polite way of saying it? :\
 
Last edited:
brickwall.gif
 
britboy4321 said:
BTW Tell me if you ever choose to reveal your 'Sneaky secret you refuse to say'
Click to expand...
What is the 'sneaky secret' and why are you quoting it? :confused:

Look down the list of Labour governments since 1910, and see that each one eventually runs out of money (even Attlee's, but he is to be credited with maintaining such high employment throughout his troubled government). Their terms are always short for this reason - original Labour economics is an ideology and does not work.

However, I have said before that I disagree with 'looking back' any more than a decade to gauge the performance of a current political party, and I remind you that I only brought up the subject of Labour's historical performance in response to another recollection.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Look down the list of Labour governments since 1910, and see that each one eventually runs out of money. Their terms are always short for this reason - original Labour economics is an ideology and does not work.
Click to expand...

So the bottom line is when you measure how a government performs economically you are actually referring to the amount of money in the coffers? And that's why labour have performed badly economically?

Before I begin, seriously, is this some kind of joke? you see 'GDP' and raise me 'Amount of money in the coffers' as your economic proof labour has performed worse economically than the tories over the years. please, please tell me that is a joke.


I also smiled when I read your 'All labour terms are short because the coffers run out of money'. Not least because you are describing the current Labour term as 'short'. But also, your double-whammy that you suggest that this fella's government

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain actually collapsed because the coffers were empty - not Hitler after all!

Now, even you must admit, THAT is worthy of a rofl.


( The sneaky secret is that you had nothing reasonable to base your 'labour has historically done worse economically than the tories' statement on whatsoever, and everyone here knows it. It seems you just thought the fact up out of thin air!
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Look down the list of Labour governments since 1910, and see that each one eventually runs out of money (even Attlee's, but he is to be credited with maintaining such high employment throughout his troubled government). Their terms are always short for this reason - original Labour economics is an ideology and does not work.
Click to expand...
Ok, something else that could be cleared up here. I keep hearing two lines of attack at the current Labour government's economic policy and let's see which one is correct:

1) The heart of this argument is that despite the fact the UK economy had a huge boom, it was a 'fake boom'.

I won't go into any detail as people arguing that way will know about it. The second argument is:

2) The growth began in under the previous Conservative administration, and only continued due to the continuation of Conservative policy.

So, what I'd like to know is, do people that believe this 'fake boom' was spawned from Conservative policy? Or was it a real boom conceived from Conservative policy? I would have to say that I haven't seen any true examples of labour economics at work, under the Labour government of present.
 
naffa said:
1) The heart of this argument is that despite the fact the UK economy had a huge boom, it was a 'fake boom'.
Click to expand...
The boom itself wasn't entirely Labour's fault. No one in their right mind is saying that. However, their bad economic policies mean that we as a country, economy and most individuals are faired far worse than comparative economies in the UK.


2) The growth began in under the previous Conservative administration, and only continued due to the continuation of Conservative policy.
Click to expand...
I don't entirely agree with this. The growth began under Major, yes, but the best legacy Tony inherited from Major was the deficit and debt reduction, which continued for a few years but then was quickly reversed.
 
http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2010/01/inflation-tax-kicks-in.html
Remember when the massed ranks of the left and much of the economics commentariat told us that Britain was on the brink of a deflationary black hole, and that the only way of saving ourselves was to slam the printing presses into overdrive?

Hmm, yes, well, this morning we heard that CPI inflation has gapped up by the biggest monthly increase since records began (1996). RPI inflation has increased by the biggest monthly amount since 1979 - ie back amid the wreckage left by the last Labour government.

Since the collapse of Lehman's in September 2008, the UK price level as measured by the CPI has increased by 2.4%. It perhaps doesn't sound much, but it's happened during the deepest recession since the 30s, and the figures do not yet include this month's 2.5% increase in VAT.

So who are the victims?

Ultimately, all of us who depend on the long-term health and success of the British economy: banana republics have never been much good at delivering anything but bananas.

More immediately, anyone on a fixed income is squarely in the line of fire. And most of all, that means pensioners and savers.

As the Telegraph points out, a saver on the standard rate of income tax now needs to earn at least 3.63% on a deposit account, otherwise the net of tax return will be negative in real inflation adjusted terms. Yet currently, there isn't a single easy access account that pays that, and most pay well under 1%.

We're right back to the inflation tax: anyone with a bank or building society savings account, and anyone with a private pension is going to get seriously whacked.

Care? As we've blogged many times (eg here) socialists hate savers. Savers constitute the rentier class living off the backs of the workers. They deserve whatever they get, right up to and including being stood up against the wall and shot.

Of course, the Bank of England - the guys who've actually implemented this madness - they're supposed not to be socialists. In fact, if memory serves, there was once some vague idea that they'd be independent of government.
Click to expand...
 
Inflation is the lesser of two evils when compared against the deflation Labour managed to just successfully avoid (thank goodness) by injecting money into the economy. Everyone thinks deflation is much, much worse than inflation.

'Burningourmoney.com'? Seriously? Tell me -- have you also checked out 'Rightwing-we-utterley-hate-labour.com'? - I've heard they're also quite impartial ??

Unfortunately you will not understand any of that first previous sentence whatsoever :( sorry :(
 
Last edited:
britboy4321 said:
Inflation is the lesser of two evils when compared against the deflation Labour managed to just successfully avoid (thank goodness) by injecting money into the economy. Everyone thinks deflation is much, much worse than inflation.
Click to expand...
Indeed, but if we print sterling, we may be heading for too much inflation and it will severely stifle recovery and consumer churn in the economy.


'Burningourmoney.com'. Tell me -- have you checked out 'Rightwing-we-utterley-hate-labour.com' - I've heard they're quite impartial :)
Click to expand...
Why do you think it is right-wing? It is a blog which is reasonably well researched and is one of many highlighting Government failings in managing money and the public sector paybill, of which there are many.


Unfortunately you will not understand any of that first previous sentence whatsoever :( sorry :(
Click to expand...
Grow up :rolleyes:
 
Hatter The Mad said:
Indeed, but if we print sterling, we may be heading for too much inflation and it will severely stifle recovery and consumer churn in the economy.
Click to expand...

indeed it's a tightrope. In a perfect world we'd have 0% inflation. But this is so close to the dreaded 'deflation' that governments opt for a little higher. I think the figure '2.5%' or thereabouts is considered a pretty good target generally.

Large inflation is indeed our biggest threat now apart from the feared 'double dipper' recession. I'd go for something like 'Leave the money in the economy until inflation hits 7% so people keep spending, then start pulling it back in, in may be a year, when recession (and the lack of spending confidence it encourages, unemployment etc) are hopefully but a distant memory)'.

4% is no big deal really, it's just not perfect. Not worth newspaper's column inches I wouldn't have said apart from on a very slow news day ..
 
Last edited:
scorza said:
Troubles, not panics. Remember that the BoE has another weapon for combating inflation besides interest rates - reducing the amount of money it's printing. I'd expect quantitative easing to cease completely before interest rates are raised.
Click to expand...

The pound has held up due to QE effectively meaning the BoE is printing money to buy public debt (gilts). Once QE ends the pound will be more exposed. Then let's see what happens to inflation.
 
I would love to see King's letter if inflation goes over 3%...

"Dear Gordon.

It was your fault. VAT rate change and continued duty rises. Please learn the effects of the actions of your government.

Thanks

BoE"

Would be brilliant and highly appropriate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom