[jaxie]

What labour never explain is where the money for all this is coming from. It's great to make big sweeping promises but the fact they have to be paid for somehow is why we've just had 6 years of austerity. Still paying for the last labour government.

Tbf the Tories haven't published their manifesto yet. All this about tax hikes is pure speculation until they do.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by jaxie

What labour never explain is where the money for all this is coming from. It's great to make big sweeping promises but the fact they have to be paid for somehow is why we've just had 6 years of austerity. Still paying for the last labour government.

Tbf the Tories haven't published their manifesto yet. All this about tax hikes is pure speculation until they do.

We haven't had six years of austerity because of the last NL government! We have had six years of austerity because austerity is part of neoliberal economic preference! All neoliberal governments employ austerity because its their economic ideal.

The only way they could follow that preference was to rid the country of creeping socialism and that's why our government puts the world crash squarely on Browns shoulders and the tragic thing is, so many of us bought into that lie.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

We haven't had six years of austerity because of the last NL government! We have had six years of austerity because austerity is part of neoliberal economic preference! All neoliberal governments employ austerity because its their economic ideal.

The only way they could follow that preference was to rid the country of creeping socialism and that's why our government puts the world crash squarely on Browns shoulders and the tragic thing is, so many of us bought into that lie.

The crash may have been considerably worse DR too, had the Cons been in.
The Cons felt Labour regulated the banks too much,Howard and Cameron would have then regulated the banks far less.

You are right to say that is a lie laid on only Browns and the then govts.shoulders.

That crash was coming no matter what any govt.was doing or what Party was in power either,no one in the UK or even across the World in any way really saw it coming at all.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

The crash may have been considerably worse DR too, had the Cons been in.
The Cons felt Labour regulated the banks too much,Howard and Cameron would have then regulated the banks far less.

You are right to say that is a lie laid on only Browns and the then govts.shoulders.

That crash was coming no matter what any govt.was doing or what Party was in power either,no one in the UK or even across the World in any way really saw it coming at all.

No doubt about it. It wasn’t only Cameron and Osborne who pleaded with Brown not to help the banks out with government funds, it was Bush too, but in the end the US copied Browns plan to the letter. Brown broke the fall and every nation after, played catch up. You have to wonder what Cameron and Osborne would of done; I think we can be fairly certain there would have been no stimulus!

Nobody's suggesting Brown saw the financial brick wall that was approaching but then nobody did. Neither are they suggesting that we should of let banks run like casino’s but that was happening the western world over and ended being a very hard lesson to us all.

Regardless of what the Tories tell us, he was the right man at the right time. How Gordon Brown and Mervyn King handled the crisis was nothing short of heroic but whilst King received a knighthood, Brown became person-non-grata.