The Successes of our Labour Government

[Rupert_Baehr]

Unfortunately not the political voting system.

 

In reply to your own question...go and find out how many people voted for New Labour compared to how many DIDNT vote for New Labour in 2005.

 

Even leaving out the sizeable quantity that didn't vote at all, I believe you will find an unhealthy imbalance in British politics and in the laughable, laudable voting system.

 

It's not the voters who worry me. It's the non-voters and those who hop up and down full of self-righteousness (and beer) before the election then on the day wimp out.

 

On the day of the election in 2005 I was livid! - I'm still bloody angry (and there is nothing else which has held my anger for so long - I have the attention span of a newt, but I'll explain.)

 

I don't like party politics. (I've said that many times and I'm prepared to say it every time I get a chance. I advocate a representative system where the representatives are 'obliged' to represent those who put them there (If only inasmuch as if they upset the electorate, they can be recalled.)

 

(Are any of the parties offering this? - It'd be a start!)

 

I knew I was going to be out of the country on the day of the 2005 general election. I was registered to vote, so I applied (in plenty of time - I applied a month or two beforehand - for an 'absentee' postal vote.

 

'Oh, certainly, Sir Rupert!'

 

'We'll get the paperwork to you in plenty of time, Sir'

 

On the day of the election, I was in Brussels.

 

I was not permitted to vote. That has never before happened to me. I was extremely displeased.

 

It was - as far as I was concerned - political rape. I was out of the country 'on government business' and the government (or its flunkies, who operated the voting offices) denied me the right to vote.

 

Was I upset? - Well slightly more than a bit.

[Rupert_Baehr]

OH, BTW: I wouldn't have voted Labour in that election for anything.

 

But I do hope that all you young things vote Labour in May.

 

You will, after all, be voting for your future.

 

If - in 5 years time - Labour has behaved as it usually does (screwed things up even worse) - you may consider taking the government on a trip to the seaside.

 

I recommend Beachy Head.

 

If the government haven't dug you out of the hole by then, perhaps they might wish to demonstrate how they're going to fly you out of indebtedness.

 

350ft is at least a start.

[llamatron]

39. Over £20 billion in bringing social housing to decent standards – every council house being modernised

 

I don't have a problem with paying for health, food, clothing and shelter for those who can't afford it. However this point annoys me. I pay enough for a mortgage in renting a crappy house with damp etc. I can't afford to buy my own house yet my money goes towards modernising other peoples houses?

 

This is my main problem with labours throw money at it policy. I work and save to afford a laptop and my taxes go to buying someone a laptop for free:loopy:

[Tony]

But they are poor, you are a taxpayer.

[Titanic99]

Lies lies lies .. just stop peddling your utter rubbish. This has been disproved time and time again. The last time was here: http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=6095884&postcount=221

 

Why do you lie so much? do you think people are stupid and will believe you if you keep saying the same thing over and over.

 

Well these people seem to think so, perhaps it would help if you told us why you are better qualified than them to reach a figure.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8405901.stm

[Tony]

From your own link

 

Household wealth reached £9 trillion in Great Britain between 2006 and 2008, according to a survey from the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

 

Its new wealth and assets survey found that 39% was in property, 39% in pension assets, 11% in financial assets and 11% in physical goods.

 

The average wealth of households was put at £204,500.

 

But while half of households owned just 9% of the wealth, the most prosperous 20% of households held 62%.

 

 

Care to go on with the rest of the story or shall we wait for everyone else?

[Berberis]

Well these people seem to think so, perhaps it would help if you told us why you are better qualified than them to reach a figure.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8405901.stm

 

The Office of National statistics is better qualified and that’s where the data comes from which is also referenced in my post.

 

Here is a direct quote as you seem incapable of even looking at the link I have provided.

 

Total net worth of the UK, including financial assets, at the end of 2008 was £6,954 billion. This is a decrease of £177 billion on the previous year.

 

Detailed figures of the country’s wealth show that the most valuable asset continues to be housing with a total value of £3,923 billion. This is equivalent to 56 per cent of the nation’s wealth, and is down 9 per cent on the previous year. The value of housing stock belonging to the household and non-profit organisations sector was worth £3,693 billion.

 

You’re wrong and you can’t admit it. Yet another trait you share with your beloved Labour party.

[Titanic99]

The Office of National statistics is better qualified and that’s where the data comes from which is also referenced in my post.

 

Here is a direct quote as you seem incapable of even looking at the link I have provided.

 

 

 

You’re wrong and you can’t admit it. Yet another trait you share with your beloved Labour party.

 

Well that's a bit odd cos it is the Office of National Statistics that is saying that it reached 9 Trillion and that the figure had previously been under-estimated.

 

"Household wealth reached £9 trillion in Great Britain between 2006 and 2008, according to a survey from the Office for National Statistics (ONS)."

 

"But they do show that the nation's wealth was originally far higher than the estimates derived from the national accounts.

 

An ONS spokesman said the main reason for the difference was probably that the new survey attributed a higher value to households' accrued pension rights than the national accounts."

 

Whether it is 7,8 or 9 Trillion, it is still a lot more than when Labour came to power.

 

It also affords your Tory friends lots of opportunities to take some of these assets away from people, just think how much you could make from the sale of Council Houses this time round, it must really have got your collective juices flowing.

[Tony]

I'll let others deal with the finer points but can I ask one thing; how do you spend your house?

[Titanic99]

I'll let others deal with the finer points but can I ask one thing; how do you spend your house?

 

I'm not sure of the relevance of the question, but there are plenty of Equity Release schems around should you need to use some of the value of it.

 

Here's some information for you, I'm sure you'd agree that the more your proerty is worth then the more you can release.

 

http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/products/equity_release/equity_release.html