why all the hate for hs2?

100% agree. The lack of continuity between government kills innovation and entrepreneurship and major infrastructure projects.

I mean there should be able to to a cross party agreements than projects will be carried on, assuming both sides agree. It's worse I think scrapping a project that has already done significant tunneling and building. But at the same time the dilly dallying that the government does costs us the tax payers a lot more.

If such a utopia exists I'm moving there.
 
The Mortgage crash started in the USA and effected the world ; yet you blame Labour for that? Ok then.
eh?? All the above was done in the UK only by Labour and I called out the US contagion already? Not sure you understand the fiscal blowback...

It was these actions that left the UK financial services sector particularly exposed to the crunch when it happened.
 
I'd say both - deregulation, castrating of the regulators, extending credit provision, capital rule changes, counter cycle activity, expanded public spending etc etc certainly sits heavily on Labour and then factors such as the US contagion would be environmental.
A global credit crunch was the fault of the UK Labour Party?

I think it might be an act of patriotism if you stayed home next GE day.
 
A global credit crunch was the fault of the UK Labour Party?

I think it might be an act of patriotism if you stayed home next GE day.

A strawman and an ad hominem....really think you landed that one....?

Re-read my points, you clearly either haven't read them or grasped them, either way more thinking on your part
 
Last edited:
A strawman and an ad hominem....really think you landed that one....?

Re-read my points, you clearly either haven't read them or grasped them, either way more thinking on your part
"Labour banking crisis" is the foolish thing you originally posted.

Everyone has a patriotic duty to educate themselves out of ignorantly harming their country (eg by electing inept corrupt grifters).

Calling the global financial crisis the "Labour banking crisis" looks like a failure of that duty.
 
watching this on sky news atm and there seems to be an out and out hate campaign towards this.

couple of things i'm confused about.



why do labour seem to be against it? were they not the ones that initially introduced hs2?

why all the hate towards a project that will bring a huge benefit to the country as a whole. I can understand opposition from someone who is going to find hs2 running through their back garden but it seems that more than just people on the route that are against it.


i see it as a major infrastructure building project that is going to get the country moving create tens of thousands of jobs and from the figures i've read be a boost to the economy overall (well long term anyway)

Because the current government have been telling us for many years that we are so short of money that we all need to make sacrifices but, apparently, we can afford to spend £100bn on a railway.

I was dead set against it starting in the first place but now it has started it might as well continue. The last thing we want to do is to cut back on it until it fails to perform it's original function.

I might add that the way we build infrastructure projects these days is absolutely ridiculous. Milllions is spent fending off court cases from upset parties. I do believe that the government should be given more power to carry these sort of projects without the public slowing things down and massively increasing costs. The government has a mandate from the people and should not allow a few upset groups to stand in the way. We are constantly locked at the decision stage for infrastruture projects these days and it's just crazy. Things need to be built. There will always be someone's back garden that they are built in.
 
"Labour banking crisis" is the foolish thing you originally posted.

Everyone has a patriotic duty to educate themselves out of ignorantly harming their country (eg by electing inept corrupt grifters).

Calling the global financial crisis the "Labour banking crisis" looks like a failure of that duty.
I think you're defending an ideological view, not an educated one - as I clarified to the response it was both a global event and poor fiscal policies from Labour that meant it was exacerbated.

Much like the 'UK cost of living crisis' is currently partly a geopolitically triggered event and partly the UK's fault in terms of decisions we've made..

I note you aren't calling out the same for Tory's furlough scheme that I was also challenging - again I'd say that was both a global event that some of the Tory policies made worse...

I suspect you'll find the latter easier to agree than the former, even though I'd say the former was a more damning set of actions....
 
Last edited:
I think you're defending an ideological view, not an educated one - as I clarified to the response it was both a global event and poor fiscal policies from Labour that meant it was exacerbated.

Much like the 'UK cost of living crisis' is currently partly a geopolitically triggered event and partly the UK's fault in terms of decisions we've made..

I note you aren't calling out the same for Tory's furlough scheme that I was also challenging - again I'd say that was both a global event that some of the Tory policies made worse...

I suspect you'll find the latter easier to agree than the former, even though I'd say the former was a more damning set of actions....
Labour's banking decisions were more comprehensively supported by the Tory party than Labour itself, while most Tories were clamouring for more extreme deregulation that would have meant the UK fared even worse.

It's very clear who's being ideological here.
 
Labour's banking decisions were more comprehensively supported by the Tory party than Labour itself, while most Tories were clamouring for more extreme deregulation that would have meant the UK fared even worse.

It's very clear who's being ideological here.
Ok, so are you really saying that the shadow party at the time is more to blame than the party actually making the decisions/leading the country?!? So you realise how silly this sounds?

At least it makes sense why you can see no 'labour' in the financial crisis, but I can give Pol Pot a carte blanche on the same basis....

I have no leanings whatsoever, so your ideological statements are based on ipse dixit logic, so very little to discuss.....!
 
Last edited:
Ok, so are you really saying that the shadow party at the time is more to blame than the party actually making the decisions/leading the country?!? So you realise how silly this sounds?

At least it makes sense why you can see no 'labour' in the financial crisis, but I can give Pol Pot a carte blanche on the same basis....
They're both to blame for the state of this country.
 
They're both to blame for the state of this country.
Long range - spot on, agree entirely. In different ways as you'd expect, but think this is exactly the point many fail to grasp if they can't get past the ideology - which is a sad state given how poor the political class is these days, it's a depressing thing to see people beholden to a bunch of idiots, regardless of leanings!
 
Last edited:
Ok, so are you really saying that the shadow party at the time is more to blame than the party actually making the decisions/leading the country?!? So you realise how silly this sounds?

At least it makes sense why you can see no 'labour' in the financial crisis, but I can give Pol Pot a carte blanche on the same basis....

I have no leanings whatsoever, so your ideological statements are based on ipse dixit logic, so very little to discuss.....!
Oh dear.

You seem to have forgotten you were the one to try and make the global credit crunch a Labour crisis.

I was just pointing out that 1) there's a "global" in the description that offers you a clue, and 2) your weak effort to specifically blame Labour is ludicrous because the Tories nailed their colours to the mast on this and would have made the UK fare worse.

Capping your fallacies off with "I have no leanings" shows the lack of self-awareness needed to paint yourself into these fallacious corners.

Very silly indeed!

:cry: :cry: :cry:
 
Oh dear.

You seem to have forgotten you were the one to try and make the global credit crunch a Labour crisis.

I was just pointing out that 1) there's a "global" in the description that offers you a clue, and 2) your weak effort to specifically blame Labour is ludicrous because the Tories nailed their colours to the mast on this and would have made the UK fare worse.

Capping your fallacies off with "I have no leanings" shows the lack of self-awareness needed to paint yourself into these fallacious corners.

Very silly indeed!

:cry: :cry: :cry:
Ok, so you're just trolling then....

To quote my original response as you're clearly trying to mislead/obfuscate:

NVP said:
Do you mean happened under Labour or because of Labour?
I'd say both - deregulation, castrating of the regulators, extending credit provision, capital rule changes, counter cycle activity, expanded public spending etc etc certainly sits heavily on Labour and then factors such as the US contagion would be environmental


And you're still painting the shadow party as if they had the same power as the party in power which is just plain deception.

Your trolling aside, let's agree to disagree - you believe the financial crisis was a global affair that just 'happened' to an innocent Labour - I was working in the industry at that point (in the CRO) and can tell you (as multiple investigations concluded) they weren't. You're really on your own here.

Read some Taleb if you want to understand it more, he covers this in detail, but it was heavily exacerbated by New Labour policy which is why other countries were less strained by it.

Likewise the Tory austerity policy that followed it also didn't help generate regrowth for a variety of reasons.

Anyway, move on and keep waving the flag....!
 
Last edited:
Ok, so you're just trolling then....

To quote my original response as you're clearly trying to mislead/obfuscate:

NVP said:
Do you mean happened under Labour or because of Labour?
I'd say both - deregulation, castrating of the regulators, extending credit provision, capital rule changes, counter cycle activity, expanded public spending etc etc certainly sits heavily on Labour and then factors such as the US contagion would be environmental


And you're still painting the shadow party as if they had the same power as the party in power which is just plain deception.

Your trolling aside, let's agree to disagree - you believe the financial crisis was a global affair that just 'happened' to an innocent Labour - I was working in the industry at that point (in the CRO) and can tell you (as multiple investigations concluded) they weren't. You're really on your own here.

Read some Taleb if you want to understand it more, he covers this in detail, but it was heavily exacerbated by New Labour policy which is why other countries were less strained by it.

Likewise the Tory austerity policy that followed it also didn't help generate regrowth for a variety of reasons.

Anyway, move on and keep waving the flag....!
Nobody's saying a "shadow party" (sic) has the same power. That's you putting together a strawman (like you falsely accused me).

It's a simple enough flaw to see, unless the blinkers are on too tight - How can you try and make a political point when your guys were clamouring for even more deregulation?

Here's another simple question - can you evidence anything to suggest it would have been better or worse under the Tories than under Labour? Because if not, then it was silly to try and make it a political point.

That said, if you were working in the industry at the time I can see why you're so keen to insist, "It's the fault of the people who should have been keeping me and my chums in check better."

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nobody's saying a "shadow party" (sic) has the same power. That's you putting together a strawman (like you falsely accused me).

It's a simple enough flaw to see, unless the blinkers are on too tight - How can you try and make a political point when your guys were clamouring for even more deregulation?

Here's another simple question - can you evidence anything to suggest it would have been better or worse under the Tories than under Labour? Because if not, then it was silly to try and make it a political point.

That said, if you were working in the industry at the time I can see why you're so keen to insist, "It's the fault of the people who should have been keeping me and my chums in check better."

:rolleyes:
Groan. Yours was demonstrably a strawman - you've got to move back just slinging your own fallacies back mindlessly as some form of credible argumentation.

'specifically blame Labour is ludicrous because the Tories nailed their colours to the mast on this and would have made the UK fare worse.'

- Give-to-take-back’ tax credits
- Abolition of the 10p tax rate
- 0% corporation tax
- Taxing pension fund dividend payments
- Bending to the banks
- selling the gold reserves at the worst moment possible
- tripartite financial regulation
this goes on and on as per the original list I provided

I mean you can read Gordon Brown's own admittances here in any of the coverage - to his credit he has been open about his many errors in regulation, fiscal policy, government policy and more, eg
“We made two mistakes [in scrapping the 10p tax rate in 2007], we didn’t cover as well as we should have low-paid workers…[or] the 60 to 64-year-olds who didn’t get the pensioner’s tax allowance.”

'A Treasury minister later said “the Government did not realise how many people would engage in abusive tax avoidance“, despite it being “blindingly obvious” to tax experts. Brown raised the rate from 0% to 19% when he released
how much money was being lost.'

but it's slightly ridiculous that you're arguing that he/Blair were faultless and did nothing the Tories wouldn't do, when he himself has openly admitted his government's failings (to his credit)....

Probably the most credible of that era is neither Labour or Tory, but Vince Cable who famously challenged Brown in the HoC: “Is
it not true…the growth of the British economy is sustained by consumer spending pinned against record levels of personal debt, which is secured, if at all, against house prices the Bank of England describes as well above equilibrium level?”

The idea that no one saw it, just doesn't stack up to facts. So if you can move past the uncredited ad hominem attempts, it's truly worth learning more.

But if not, then as suggested, keep waving the flag.
 
Groan. Yours was demonstrably a strawman - you've got to move back just slinging your own fallacies back mindlessly as some form of credible argumentation.

'specifically blame Labour is ludicrous because the Tories nailed their colours to the mast on this and would have made the UK fare worse.'

- Give-to-take-back’ tax credits
- Abolition of the 10p tax rate
- 0% corporation tax
- Taxing pension fund dividend payments
- Bending to the banks
- selling the gold reserves at the worst moment possible
- tripartite financial regulation
this goes on and on as per the original list I provided

I mean you can read Gordon Brown's own admittances here in any of the coverage - to his credit he has been open about his many errors in regulation, fiscal policy, government policy and more, eg
“We made two mistakes [in scrapping the 10p tax rate in 2007], we didn’t cover as well as we should have low-paid workers…[or] the 60 to 64-year-olds who didn’t get the pensioner’s tax allowance.”

'A Treasury minister later said “the Government did not realise how many people would engage in abusive tax avoidance“, despite it being “blindingly obvious” to tax experts. Brown raised the rate from 0% to 19% when he released
how much money was being lost.'

but it's slightly ridiculous that you're arguing that he/Blair were faultless and did nothing the Tories wouldn't do, when he himself has openly admitted his government's failings (to his credit)....

Probably the most credible of that era is neither Labour or Tory, but Vince Cable who famously challenged Brown in the HoC: “Is
it not true…the growth of the British economy is sustained by consumer spending pinned against record levels of personal debt, which is secured, if at all, against house prices the Bank of England describes as well above equilibrium level?”

The idea that no one saw it, just doesn't stack up to facts. So if you can move past the uncredited ad hominem attempts, it's truly worth learning more.

But if not, then as suggested, keep waving the flag.
Risible stuff.

Time and again, you've been given the opportunity to show how Labour, moreso than the alternative, made matters worse.

You've failed to take up that opportunity.

Instead you've just listed a load of perceived failing about Labour, all of which were supported by, if not criticised by the Tories for not going far enough.

It's amazing how long it's taking you to realise this.

Yet you try and insist you've no leaning.

There's none so blind as those that will not see. You really don't realise your bias.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If such a utopia exists I'm moving there.
It’s called electoral reform and PR with government by negotiation and consensus. Hopefully coming to a country near you sooner rather than later!

Oh and the next time someone decides to do something to improve the north they should you know actually start in the North not London!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom