I don't think the country can take or afford another 5 years of Labour's massive investment (using borrowed money) without reforming anything. The money just gets squandered.I dont think I could handle another 5 years of Labour. Would be the nail in the coffin for me here
As others have said, there's nothing concrete you can say one way or the other. The reality is that we are in severe financial troubles as a nation, and we all have to make sacrifices to ensure the future stability and prosperity of our society. The private and public sector alike will have to find ways to minimise costs (though to some extent the private sector have a head start). If we don't do this, the mounting debt will just get bigger and more expensive to service, putting us in an even worse position than now.This might sound a bit daft, i know nothing and care little for politics but my manager has been filling my mind with worry that if the torries get into power we're ******, i work in a government funded school, apparently there plans would screw us over
What exactly does he mean by that? what are the torries plans for the education sector?
This poll does little to reassure me![]()
It depends what part of the public sector you work in.If you work in the public sector you have more likelihood of having a tough time financially if the conservatives get in, due to cuts in the public sector, than if Labour get in. As someone else said, it's basically ideological.
It depends what part of the public sector you work in.
It is absurd to think that Darling will remain Chancellor if Gordon Brown gets elected.Brown with Darling as Chancellor, or Cameron with Osborne as Chancellor?
It is absurd to think that Darling will remain Chancellor if Gordon Brown gets elected.
Conservative lead now down to 2 points. I am, for the first time, starting to think Labour might pull off the coup of the century
In the short term, maybe.. in the long-term, who knows? If we don't take drastic action to curb our deficit and reduce public debt, the long-term consequences could be far, far worse than simply having to find work elsewhere. You can plan for being out of work for 6 months, but it's very difficult to plan for two decades of hindered macroeconomic prosperity. The reason being that you almost can't - you just have to tolerate the suppressed living standards and slowing of wealth generation.The guy who asks the question works in public sector education. Hence I believe it's a fair bet that his and his families future will be more financially uncertain if the tories get in.
If Brown had his way at the reshuffle last year, Ed Balls would be the Chancellor right now. Fortunately for this country, Brown was too weak to force that through, and was blocked.Who do you think would replace him?
I don't agree with you btw.
There's something dodgy about Ed Balls. If, somehow, Labour pull off a win, I fear Ed Balls will get a promotion to any job he wants with him being a key Brownite. I just get the feeling he's a slimy, fishy character.Yes - Ed Balls. With zero Chancellory experience. Just because he is Brown's closest ally.
2009Britain under Gordon Brown is a more unequal country than at any time since modern records began in the early 1960s, after the incomes of the poor fell and those of the rich rose in the three years after the 2005 general election.
2008“It’s a moral disgrace that we still have one of the worst child poverty records in Europe,” said Kate Green, Child Poverty Action Group’s chief executive. “Other countries do better, so why should British children suffer? We can end our child poverty shame and we must.”
2007The UK has been accused of failing its children, as it comes bottom of a league table for child well-being across 21 industrialised countries.
Well it certainly would be, the most incompetant government we have had for an age and yet they are still repeatedly voted in. Who is voting for these people? :/
I do not count the advisory role he had as Chancellory experience to match that of Darling's.That's Ed Balls the ex-FT economic lead writer (1990-1994), the shadow chancellor's (Gordon Brown) economic advisor (1994-1997), the economic advisor to the chancellor (1997-1999) and then chief economic advisor to HM Treasury (1999-2004). So plenty of Chancellory experience.
Yet you're constantly campaigning to see George Osborne become Chancellor... Double standards at their best/worst.I do not count the advisory role he had as Chancellory experience to match that of Darling's.
I do not count the advisory role he had as Chancellory experience to match that of Darling's.
From what I know, and can find out, Darling had little or no links to the HM Treasury before becoming Chancellor. Undoubtedly he now has more experience than Balls as Chancellor because he is the incumbent and Balls has never, yet, been the Chancellor. But if we're talking about Chancellory experience over their whole careers then it could be argued that Balls has more due to having worked at HM Treasury for a longer period of time, in the past.I do not count the advisory role he had as Chancellory experience to match that of Darling's.