The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[I1L2T3]

Do you want to try your post 2189 again, with a bit more nuance this time, then?

What I was doing was explain (to Anna...again) why it didn't go so much higher than it could have, beyond the myths about it all being Tory spending. Which you know it wasn't

 

I've never once defended the size of the deficit in 2009-10. I've only ever sought to explain it. It clearly was not due to £160bn of planned spending. Even your link earlier explains this in very clear terms.

 

On the other hand, Osborne's spend is carefully planned. He has rather cleverly created flexible targets which allow him to continuously push the date he will acheice a surplus to the right. It is all very definitely planned. He even plans in for his own failure.

[L00b]

I've never once defended the size of the deficit in 2009-10. I've only ever sought to explain it. It clearly was not due to £160bn of planned spending. Even your link earlier explains this in very clear terms.

I am perfectly fine with that link: I have never once claimed Labour planned to spend £160bn. That's your strawman. This is the second time I've had to put you right about it.

On the other hand, Osborne's spend is carefully planned. He has rather cleverly created flexible targets which allow him to continuously push the date he will acheice a surplus to the right. It is all very definitely planned. He even plans in for his own failure.

I'd rather the careful planning of the past 5-and-a-bit-year, which have made for a soft wheel touch rather than full-on landing, then for a bit of bouncing along, then for the current slow ascent, than the "full-on austerity cuts" oft-alleged by cretins that would have brought the country down to PIIGs levels of economic activity and (taxable-) wealth creation, or the n-th remortgaging proposed by Labour that would have just compounded the mire and made the country still less ready for the next one than it currently is (which is far from perfect...but the best out of a bad lot).

 

How about you, I1L2T3?

 

What will it be: a bit of objectivity or a lot of bias?

[Vague_Boy]

He has rather cleverly created flexible targets which allow him to continuously push the date he will acheice a surplus to the right.

 

Nothing new there. Crash McRuin redefined his precious "golden rule".

 

Brown 'has broken' his original golden rule

 

Gordon Brown's borrowing record has come under intense fire after official figures confirmed that, had he not changed its parameters at the last minute, he would now have broken his golden rule.

 

Numbers published by the Treasury showed that the Chancellor would have missed the rule - which states that he must borrow only to invest over each economic cycle - by £2.5bn.

 

The figures also revealed that he missed his borrowing forecast by £700m last fiscal year, despite setting the target only weeks ago in the Budget.

 

LINK

[I1L2T3]

I am perfectly fine with that link: I have never once claimed Labour planned to spend £160bn. That's your strawman. This is the second time I've had to put you right about it.

I'd rather the careful planning of the past 5-and-a-bit-year, which have made for a soft wheel touch rather than full-on landing, then for a bit of bouncing along, then for the current slow ascent, than the "full-on austerity cuts" oft-alleged by cretins that would have brought the country down to PIIGs levels of economic activity and (taxable-) wealth creation, or the n-th remortgaging proposed by Labour that would have just compounded the mire and made the country still less ready for the next one than it currently is (which is far from perfect...but the best out of a bad lot).

 

How about you, I1L2T3?

 

What will it be: a bit of objectivity or a lot of bias?

 

No strawman. People repeatedly argue on here that the deficit was caused by spending commitments. Not necessarily yourself but it does happen. Take it as a generalised response to generalised ignorance.

 

As for Osborne the best way to describe him is as an economic wrecking ball somehow silently demolishing the foundations of the country. That is no joke. He has been a disaster as we are all going to find out sooner or later.

 

---------- Post added 09-10-2015 at 18:28 ----------

 

Nothing new there. Crash McRuin redefined his precious "golden rule".

 

 

 

LINK

 

All very nice but he he never planned for £160bn of deficit spending in 2009-10.

 

Loobs link explains this very well.

Edited October 9, 2015 by I1L2T3

[banjodeano]

I think the Labour party will become largely irrellevent - much like the libdems, in years to come.

 

It's clear there is no taste for anything other than 'centre' politics in UK.

Why, has there been a choice?

[Blackbeard]

Where is Jack Clarkson now? Last I heard he had suspended himself, not sure if that is from UKIP or the Lib Dems.

 

Just seen in the Star that Jack Clarkson is to stand trial on a charge of assault.

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/former-police-inspector-and-sheffield-ukip-councillor-on-assault-charge-1-7506568

He spent 2 years working on victim support, I wonder if he offered his skills this time.

[L00b]

People repeatedly argue on here that the deficit was caused by spending commitments.

Some people repeatedly argue on here that the deficit was partially caused by spending commitments....

Not necessarily yourself but it does happen. Take it as a generalised response to generalised ignorance.

...but they are manifestly caught up in the debate as 'ignorant'

[drummonds]

Some people repeatedly argue on here that the deficit was partially caused by spending commitments....

...but they are manifestly caught up in the debate as 'ignorant'

 

according to yougovs poll it would appear that you need a very particular type of wisdom to swallow labou's line.

 

 

"71% think Labour need to make major changes to their policies and beliefs to be fit for goverment (up 2 from 2010), 58% think they have lost touch with ordinary working people (down 1), 56% think they haven’t faced up to the damaged they caused to the economy "

 

it seems the majority know that labour cannot be trusted with the economy.

[Flanker7]

Thank Goodness the Labour party pulled out of voting with the Tory's.

It was embarrassing and naive.

Just like standing on the same platform, literally, as them for the Scottish Independence campaign. The Scots will take a long time to forget that and it lost them so many seats in the General Election.

[drummonds]

Thank Goodness the Labour party pulled out of voting with the Tory's.

It was embarrassing and naive.

Just like standing on the same platform, literally, as them for the Scottish Independence campaign. The Scots will take a long time to forget that and it lost them so many seats in the General Election.

 

Mike Gapes

✔

@MikeGapes

 

There is now no collective Shadow cabinet responsibility in our Party, no clarity on economic policy and no credible leadership. @BBCr4today

8:21 AM - 13 Oct 2015

 

Mike Gapes is the Labour MP for Ilford South,