I did say 'at the moment'. I don't care about particular parties, I really don't, every party has taken wrong turns but it's no excuse to ignore the ones that have been fighting over the steering wheel as they take us over a cliff.
2022 mini-budget discussion
- Thread starter Harlequin
- Start date
- Status
We have been going over the cliff since 1997. It just takes time to fall. Problem we can't just blame the current government, because the base of our problems come from previous governments.
When policies are made it can take years or even decades to show the impact it has. Good example is Wirtschaftswunder.
Clearly Blair government has destroyed housing in our country.
Oh, under Blair they made it even more difficult to use right to buy money to build homes, by 2007 he blocked council building in favour of affordable building.
Last edited:
Before then.
So basically it was summed up perfectly earlier with the comment regarding the Romans.
It's interesting that your seemingly arbitrary date from which you suddenly decided the country took a downward turn just happens to coincide with when the only Labour government in the last 40 years took power? That seems to be based purely on some Partisan idealism than any objective reality.
The Tories have held power since 2010, almost as long as the Labour government before it, yet seemingly have done NOTHING to correct what you see as "seeds of destruction" and instead seem to have complimented it with a whole new garden, fertilizer and irrigation for those seeds.
12 years and what do they have to show for it? Why have they not made any headway in reversing any of the perceived "damage" that Labour caused before them?
What have they been doing for the last 12 years?
What the previous governments have been doing, benefiting themselves, members and their party, and not the people they represent.
I'm going to guess Mrwong is in their 40's and as such 1997 is when their world started, anything before that is probably ignored.
Error in that report!
What part about me not questioning the validity of your claims is it that you don't get? I even edited my post to make it clear that I'm not questioning the validity of your claims, I'm questioning whether you've looked into the causes and/or alternative solutions to the issues you raised. You've not even come close to addressing that, in fact the more you keep going on about the validity of your claims the more you're proving that you've not looked into the causes and/or alternative solutions to the issues you raised, that you're playing into the whole divisive politics nonsense.
The causes I have posted many times.
Last edited:
Previous governments have not been in power for the last 12 years, the Tories have.
You keep trying to deflect from the utter shambles and objective failure of the sitting government and it's party by constantly shouting "But Labour!" - It's tiring and frankly demonstrates and level of partisan mentality and attitude which clearly shows a bias.
Even you're arguments about how "Why didn't Labour overturn this Tory Policy" are undermined when you try to then argue "But Labour made things that way!" as if somehow the sitting Tory Party government of the last 12 years we're unable to overturn it.
You still have not explained how Tony Blair is responsible for many of Todays problems, how he must have convinced Putin to invade Ukraine to start a lot of this shambles, or how Gordon Brown is connected to the Pension crash a few days ago?
Please Clarify
Last edited:
Maybe you'd like to link me to the posts where you did that because i seem to have missed them.
Previous governments have not been in power for the last 12 years, the Tories have.
You keep trying to deflect from the utter shambles and objective failure of the sitting government and it's party by constantly shouting "But Labour!" - It's tiring and frankly demonstrates and level of partisan mentality and attitude which clearly shows a bias.
Even you're arguments about how "Why didn't Labour overturn this Tory Policy" are undermined when you try to then argue "But Labour made things that way!" as if somehow the sitting Tory Party government of the last 12 years we're unable to overturn it.
You still have not explained how Tony Blair is responsible for many of Todays problems, how he must have convinced Putin to invade Ukraine to start a lot of this shambles, or how Gordon Brown is connected to the Pension crash a few days ago?
Please Clarify
I have said many times, it takes time for policies to feed into the system. Government policies feed into our system at different speeds.
People here point to Tories and right to buy, the impact of right to buy, but it goes deeper than this.
Most focus on right to buy and blaming the Tories, but what did the labour government do to impact the right to buy policy's which is the important question here. Labour could have removed it or made sure money from right to buy when back into building more social homes.
This is where many here fail to see, this is why it is not that simple to blame the current government.
This is as simple as I can explain it, and easy to comprehend. If you can't understand it think about what I just posted for a day or so.
Btw the biggest impact in our socioeconomic factors was the biggest change from the 70 to the 80s, a massive leap forward one achieved by rtb.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Wonger taking guff to whole new levels. 
Very true, Some policies to take time for their effects or impacts to become apparent - not all though.
Both Tory and Labour governments have utter failed to maintain council housing stocks since RtB was introduced, however (and as I keep trying to point out to you) in the 43 years since RtB was implimented, Labour have held power for roughly 13 years, while the Tories have held it for almost 30.
Why has the Tory Party so utterly failed to address the problem of social housing when they have been in direct control of it for 30 of the last 43 years?
You can't keep trying to pin all the blame for all the crap we suffer now on a single 13 year stretch where Labour last held the reigns and focus more on the 30+ years the Tories have had to dictate social, fiscal and immigration policy within this Country.
Why do you keep blaming labour? The tories have been in power for 12(twelve) years lmao. In the last 40 years Labour have been in power for 13 of them. Funnily enough when the country had significant growth labour were in power.. Since then? Downhill.
Stop talking nonsense.
More to the point... Even if labour is the big, bad bogeyman and started all this... He's still continuing to ignore the planet-sized elephant in the room, which is the question "Why then, did the Tories not reverse said policies to undo what Labour did, in the last 12 years they have have led this Country?
Anything and everything can easily be blamed on Labour and hell, it could even be true, all of it.. but it still does not excuse the Tories for doing nothing at all about it for the last 12 years, if what Labour did was in fact so catastrophically terrible for the country that it's causing all these problems now?
Last edited:
You keep speaking about 30 years Tories and 12 years labour, I could say well labour had 24 years in power 1964 if we want to play that game.
I could say let's deduct the time when Nick and the Tories were in charge coalition government, let's deduct 5 years.
Once we put that in place they both had equal amount.
Last edited:
For sure we could, but then we get into the realms of "Lets just blame the Roman's".
But how far back do you want to go? I know we could go back as the end of WW2, which could be a fair assessment for an "era" and the story would still be the same... Significantly more Tory Rule than Labour Rule... But how many policies from back then still affect us now, other than the REALLY big things like the NHS?
I think going back to roughly 1980 is a good metric, it is arguably the start of the "digital age" and thus in itself could be seen as the beginning of a "new era" and as such is probably a valid cut-off point in the discussion, although you may disagree.
Also as a side-note.. the impact to our socio-economic situation after the 70s, through the 80's and into the 90's was as a result of the technological and computer revolution, NOT Right To Buy. - What an absurd thing to even suggest that RtB had anything to do with increased socio-economic status in the 80s.
*edit* Also let's not forget our IMF bailout in the 70s, just in time to fund a computing / technology boom that was unfolding...
*Double Edit* Also another reason for "keep speaking about 30 years Tories and 12 years Labour" is because we were discussing social housing and RtB. RtB did not exist prior to late '79 so naturally we would be taking that as the "launching off point".
Last edited:
It does but how deep you're choosing to go is seemingly restricted to 'but Labour'. It would be very disingenuous to suggest that on the one hand it goes deeper than this but at the same time moan about what did Labour do.
The reason people point to Tories and right to buy is because i would assume that's where most people consider the problem started. Should Labour have done more to reverse that? Sure. However you seem to be ignoring any and all reasons for them not doing so, the question is are you doing that because you're ignorant of the possible reasons or are you doing it because you want to pit one group against another instead of holding those responsible to account.
Why didn't Labour change rtb, why didn't they reinvest the money. rtb funds to social housing. Labour had a long time to make adjustments to RTB but did not. Labour created lots of new laws, they even made London the surveillance capital of the world.
Gordon Brown destroyed pensions with his pension raids, this cause pension funds to find new avenues, making it more sensitive to lesser shocks. But somehow the media have forgotten about that.
You see it is not as simple as you say.
Gordon Brown destroyed pensions with his pension raids, this cause pension funds to find new avenues, making it more sensitive to lesser shocks. But somehow the media have forgotten about that.
You see it is not as simple as you say.
Why can't you address the many points other posters have raised with you?
Why are you starting to sound like a broken record with your 'but the government from 12 years ago'?
Why are you starting to sound like a broken record with your 'but the government from 12 years ago'?
Indeed, but every time anyone attempts to get you to elucidate you refuse, why?
Last edited:
- Status