You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > General election 15: First time Voter!
April 25 2024 12.56pm

General election 15: First time Voter!

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 7 of 10 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

 

nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 08 Mar 15 1.05pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.57pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.51pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.46pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.36pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.22pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.10pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.57am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.51am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.46am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.43am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.21am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 10.51am

Quote Willo at 08 Mar 2015 10.47am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 10.29am

. I'd be amazed if the Tories got as many seats as in 2010.

If the Conservatives don't increase their number of seats on the back of an economic revival there WILL be questions "Asked in the house".

Since 2010, Conservatives have been getting Britain's economy back on track, cutting the deficit, backing businesses, creating jobs.

The plan is working. Britain's economy is recovering. But Labour's plans for more spending, more borrowing and more debt would wreck the progress the country has made - and mean chaos for the economy and higher taxes for hardworking families.

Think I shall now get off my "Soapbox" !


Edited by Willo (08 Mar 2015 10.47am)

Osborne has created more debt than all other labour governments combined. Yes very successful.


Surely most of our debt is what was inherited from Gordon.


A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

From [Link]


I'll debate with you Nick on what you think - I will not debate with your links.


So when I give evidence, you give up. Fair enough.

No, I've told you what I think - I haven't plugged my posts with links to what other people think.


You've told me what you think, can you back it up with evidence? You know what I think so I backed it up with evidence that has helped shape my opinions.


It's what I think Nick, that the debt is higher, that the debt was largely inherited, that the money in is less than the money out and while that continues to be the case, the debt will continue to grow. URL's to what other people think isn't really me debating is it - it's me debating by proxy for someone else opinion.


So where do you get the information that forms your opinion?


Newspapers, tv, radio, work, discussions with family, friends and colleagues


Same as me, except I've learned to take what is in the mainstream media with a pinch of salt so look beyond that.

So where is the evidence that the economy is the fastest improving in the world?


At no point have I said anything about the speed of growth in the economy. My comments have been purely on the debt and the deficit.


And where is your evidence for this. The link I provided shows it is nonsense. I need a counter argument further than that's what I've been told by the media to convince me I'm afraid.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View chris123's Profile chris123 Flag hove actually 08 Mar 15 1.15pm Send a Private Message to chris123 Add chris123 as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.05pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.57pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.51pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.46pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.36pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.22pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.10pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.57am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.51am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.46am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.43am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.21am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 10.51am

Quote Willo at 08 Mar 2015 10.47am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 10.29am

. I'd be amazed if the Tories got as many seats as in 2010.

If the Conservatives don't increase their number of seats on the back of an economic revival there WILL be questions "Asked in the house".

Since 2010, Conservatives have been getting Britain's economy back on track, cutting the deficit, backing businesses, creating jobs.

The plan is working. Britain's economy is recovering. But Labour's plans for more spending, more borrowing and more debt would wreck the progress the country has made - and mean chaos for the economy and higher taxes for hardworking families.

Think I shall now get off my "Soapbox" !


Edited by Willo (08 Mar 2015 10.47am)

Osborne has created more debt than all other labour governments combined. Yes very successful.


Surely most of our debt is what was inherited from Gordon.


A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

From [Link]


I'll debate with you Nick on what you think - I will not debate with your links.


So when I give evidence, you give up. Fair enough.

No, I've told you what I think - I haven't plugged my posts with links to what other people think.


You've told me what you think, can you back it up with evidence? You know what I think so I backed it up with evidence that has helped shape my opinions.


It's what I think Nick, that the debt is higher, that the debt was largely inherited, that the money in is less than the money out and while that continues to be the case, the debt will continue to grow. URL's to what other people think isn't really me debating is it - it's me debating by proxy for someone else opinion.


So where do you get the information that forms your opinion?


Newspapers, tv, radio, work, discussions with family, friends and colleagues


Same as me, except I've learned to take what is in the mainstream media with a pinch of salt so look beyond that.

So where is the evidence that the economy is the fastest improving in the world?


At no point have I said anything about the speed of growth in the economy. My comments have been purely on the debt and the deficit.


And where is your evidence for this. The link I provided shows it is nonsense. I need a counter argument further than that's what I've been told by the media to convince me I'm afraid.


I don't have a link - it's what I think.

That the debt won't get smaller until cash out is less than cash in. And that means austerity

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 08 Mar 15 1.24pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 1.15pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.05pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.57pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.51pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.46pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.36pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.22pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.10pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.57am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.51am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.46am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.43am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.21am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 10.51am

Quote Willo at 08 Mar 2015 10.47am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 10.29am

. I'd be amazed if the Tories got as many seats as in 2010.

If the Conservatives don't increase their number of seats on the back of an economic revival there WILL be questions "Asked in the house".

Since 2010, Conservatives have been getting Britain's economy back on track, cutting the deficit, backing businesses, creating jobs.

The plan is working. Britain's economy is recovering. But Labour's plans for more spending, more borrowing and more debt would wreck the progress the country has made - and mean chaos for the economy and higher taxes for hardworking families.

Think I shall now get off my "Soapbox" !


Edited by Willo (08 Mar 2015 10.47am)

Osborne has created more debt than all other labour governments combined. Yes very successful.


Surely most of our debt is what was inherited from Gordon.


A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

From [Link]


I'll debate with you Nick on what you think - I will not debate with your links.


So when I give evidence, you give up. Fair enough.

No, I've told you what I think - I haven't plugged my posts with links to what other people think.


You've told me what you think, can you back it up with evidence? You know what I think so I backed it up with evidence that has helped shape my opinions.


It's what I think Nick, that the debt is higher, that the debt was largely inherited, that the money in is less than the money out and while that continues to be the case, the debt will continue to grow. URL's to what other people think isn't really me debating is it - it's me debating by proxy for someone else opinion.


So where do you get the information that forms your opinion?


Newspapers, tv, radio, work, discussions with family, friends and colleagues


Same as me, except I've learned to take what is in the mainstream media with a pinch of salt so look beyond that.

So where is the evidence that the economy is the fastest improving in the world?


At no point have I said anything about the speed of growth in the economy. My comments have been purely on the debt and the deficit.


And where is your evidence for this. The link I provided shows it is nonsense. I need a counter argument further than that's what I've been told by the media to convince me I'm afraid.


I don't have a link - it's what I think.

That the debt won't get smaller until cash out is less than cash in. And that means austerity

To get more cash in we need to invest.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View chris123's Profile chris123 Flag hove actually 08 Mar 15 1.29pm Send a Private Message to chris123 Add chris123 as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.24pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 1.15pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.05pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.57pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.51pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.46pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.36pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.22pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.10pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.57am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.51am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.46am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.43am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.21am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 10.51am

Quote Willo at 08 Mar 2015 10.47am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 10.29am

. I'd be amazed if the Tories got as many seats as in 2010.

If the Conservatives don't increase their number of seats on the back of an economic revival there WILL be questions "Asked in the house".

Since 2010, Conservatives have been getting Britain's economy back on track, cutting the deficit, backing businesses, creating jobs.

The plan is working. Britain's economy is recovering. But Labour's plans for more spending, more borrowing and more debt would wreck the progress the country has made - and mean chaos for the economy and higher taxes for hardworking families.

Think I shall now get off my "Soapbox" !


Edited by Willo (08 Mar 2015 10.47am)

Osborne has created more debt than all other labour governments combined. Yes very successful.


Surely most of our debt is what was inherited from Gordon.


A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

From [Link]


I'll debate with you Nick on what you think - I will not debate with your links.


So when I give evidence, you give up. Fair enough.

No, I've told you what I think - I haven't plugged my posts with links to what other people think.


You've told me what you think, can you back it up with evidence? You know what I think so I backed it up with evidence that has helped shape my opinions.


It's what I think Nick, that the debt is higher, that the debt was largely inherited, that the money in is less than the money out and while that continues to be the case, the debt will continue to grow. URL's to what other people think isn't really me debating is it - it's me debating by proxy for someone else opinion.


So where do you get the information that forms your opinion?


Newspapers, tv, radio, work, discussions with family, friends and colleagues


Same as me, except I've learned to take what is in the mainstream media with a pinch of salt so look beyond that.

So where is the evidence that the economy is the fastest improving in the world?


At no point have I said anything about the speed of growth in the economy. My comments have been purely on the debt and the deficit.


And where is your evidence for this. The link I provided shows it is nonsense. I need a counter argument further than that's what I've been told by the media to convince me I'm afraid.


I don't have a link - it's what I think.

That the debt won't get smaller until cash out is less than cash in. And that means austerity

To get more cash in we need to invest.


When you owe money you can borrow more - I do understand that, it's what got us in to trouble in the first place - or you can reduce your outgoings and pay down the debt

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 08 Mar 15 8.29pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 1.29pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.24pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 1.15pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 1.05pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.57pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.51pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.46pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.36pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 12.22pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 12.10pm

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.57am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.51am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.46am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 11.43am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 11.21am

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 10.51am

Quote Willo at 08 Mar 2015 10.47am

Quote chris123 at 08 Mar 2015 10.29am

. I'd be amazed if the Tories got as many seats as in 2010.

If the Conservatives don't increase their number of seats on the back of an economic revival there WILL be questions "Asked in the house".

Since 2010, Conservatives have been getting Britain's economy back on track, cutting the deficit, backing businesses, creating jobs.

The plan is working. Britain's economy is recovering. But Labour's plans for more spending, more borrowing and more debt would wreck the progress the country has made - and mean chaos for the economy and higher taxes for hardworking families.

Think I shall now get off my "Soapbox" !


Edited by Willo (08 Mar 2015 10.47am)

Osborne has created more debt than all other labour governments combined. Yes very successful.


Surely most of our debt is what was inherited from Gordon.


A quick look at the actual evidence reveals that only two Labour governments have ever left office leaving the national debt higher than it was when they came to power, all of the others have lowered the national debt as a percentage of GDP.

On the two occasions that Labour oversaw increases in the national debt there were the mitigating circumstances of huge global financial crises. The Ramsay MacDonald government of 1929-31 coincided with the Wall Street Crash (they left a 12% increase in the debt to GDP ratio), and the Blair-Brown government of 1997-2010 coincided with the 2008 financial sector insolvency crisis (an 11% increase). The other Labour governments all reduced the scale of the national debt, Clement Attlee's 1945-51 government reduced the national debt by 40% of GDP despite having to rebuild the UK economy from the ruins of the Second World War. Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government reduced the national debt by 27% of GDP and even the Wilson-Callaghan government of 1974-79 managed to reduce the debt by 4% of GDP.

The majority of Labour governments have ended up reducing the national debt, and the two that didn't coincided with the biggest global financial crisis of the 20th Century and the biggest global financial crisis so far in the 21st Century.

From [Link]


I'll debate with you Nick on what you think - I will not debate with your links.


So when I give evidence, you give up. Fair enough.

No, I've told you what I think - I haven't plugged my posts with links to what other people think.


You've told me what you think, can you back it up with evidence? You know what I think so I backed it up with evidence that has helped shape my opinions.


It's what I think Nick, that the debt is higher, that the debt was largely inherited, that the money in is less than the money out and while that continues to be the case, the debt will continue to grow. URL's to what other people think isn't really me debating is it - it's me debating by proxy for someone else opinion.


So where do you get the information that forms your opinion?


Newspapers, tv, radio, work, discussions with family, friends and colleagues


Same as me, except I've learned to take what is in the mainstream media with a pinch of salt so look beyond that.

So where is the evidence that the economy is the fastest improving in the world?


At no point have I said anything about the speed of growth in the economy. My comments have been purely on the debt and the deficit.


And where is your evidence for this. The link I provided shows it is nonsense. I need a counter argument further than that's what I've been told by the media to convince me I'm afraid.


I don't have a link - it's what I think.

That the debt won't get smaller until cash out is less than cash in. And that means austerity

To get more cash in we need to invest.


When you owe money you can borrow more - I do understand that, it's what got us in to trouble in the first place - or you can reduce your outgoings and pay down the debt


I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 08 Mar 15 8.45pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.29pm

I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.


Nope Nick.....That wasn't our money after WW2 that was the USA's money via the Marshall plan.

You know that country you love so much.

Without that money for housing and re-building Labour would not have been able to afford the NHS.

 

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Y Ddraig Goch's Profile Y Ddraig Goch Flag In The Crowd 08 Mar 15 8.51pm Send a Private Message to Y Ddraig Goch Add Y Ddraig Goch as a friend

Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Mar 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.29pm

I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.


Nope Nick.....That wasn't our money after WW2 that was the USA's money via the Marshall plan.

You know that country you love so much.

Without that money for housing and re-building Labour would not have been able to afford the NHS.

Which was only paid back about 10 years or so ago.


Edited by Y Ddraig Goch (08 Mar 2015 8.52pm)

 

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 08 Mar 15 8.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Mar 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.29pm

I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.


Nope Nick.....That wasn't our money after WW2 that was the USA's money via the Marshall plan.

You know that country you love so much.

Without that money for housing and re-building Labour would not have been able to afford the NHS.


How did you know I liked America? How astute! Great country, I'd recommend a holiday there, shame about their s***e governments.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 08 Mar 15 9.08pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.55pm

How did you know I liked America? How astute! Great country, I'd recommend a holiday there, shame about their s***e governments.


Yeah, well you can't really use the 'invest' idea in relation to the aftermath of WW2.

Most of the money used for investment wasn't ours.

We were skint.

Like now.

 

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Catfish Flag Burgess Hill 08 Mar 15 9.11pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Mar 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.29pm

I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.


Nope Nick.....That wasn't our money after WW2 that was the USA's money via the Marshall plan.

You know that country you love so much.

Without that money for housing and re-building Labour would not have been able to afford the NHS.


At the risk of diverting off into a history debate, (suits me), didn't our best friends in America pull the plug on our finances after the war? We were bankrupt and Charles Clarke's father in the Treasury was tasked with drawing up plans to conscript people to bring in the harvest to avert a famine.
There were major differences. We had a critical labour shortage and brought in hundreds of thousands of European workers to fill the gaps left, in part, by the 300,000 axis prisoners who went home. The government of the time were predicting that the population would actually drop by 1950 because of people leaving to settle in the commonwealth.
The economy was dominated by the pre war manufacturing industries and labour poured back into them. the achievement of the Attlee government was remarkable but it didn't have to deal with the unemployment problems of the 30s and its economic planning was at the expense of continuing rationing way longer than might otherwise been the case, (one of the reasons for its downfall).

 

Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 08 Mar 15 9.44pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Quote Catfish at 08 Mar 2015 9.11pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 08 Mar 2015 8.45pm

Quote nickgusset at 08 Mar 2015 8.29pm

I'm not really sure using what one may do on a household budget when paying down debts and extrapolating it to a national economic level works.
Look at how investment and building helped move the country away from debt and austerity after ww2. We set up the NHS and welfare state ffs!

Job creation (and I don't mean the zero hours sort) will bring in more tax money. Cutting much needed services vs chasing tax dodgers so they pay their fair share (for instance) . I know which I think is more morally right.


Nope Nick.....That wasn't our money after WW2 that was the USA's money via the Marshall plan.

You know that country you love so much.

Without that money for housing and re-building Labour would not have been able to afford the NHS.


At the risk of diverting off into a history debate, (suits me), didn't our best friends in America pull the plug on our finances after the war? We were bankrupt and Charles Clarke's father in the Treasury was tasked with drawing up plans to conscript people to bring in the harvest to avert a famine.
There were major differences. We had a critical labour shortage and brought in hundreds of thousands of European workers to fill the gaps left, in part, by the 300,000 axis prisoners who went home. The government of the time were predicting that the population would actually drop by 1950 because of people leaving to settle in the commonwealth.
The economy was dominated by the pre war manufacturing industries and labour poured back into them. the achievement of the Attlee government was remarkable but it didn't have to deal with the unemployment problems of the 30s and its economic planning was at the expense of continuing rationing way longer than might otherwise been the case, (one of the reasons for its downfall).


America 'pull the plug'?

In 1945 the US and Canada gave us access to a $4.34bn loan - equivalent to £27bn today.

The repayment terms were....extremely generous.....We paid it back after 56 years.

'Pull the plug' indeed.

 

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Bert the Head's Profile Bert the Head Flag Epsom 08 Mar 15 9.57pm Send a Private Message to Bert the Head Add Bert the Head as a friend

Quote Turd Alert at 06 Mar 2015 10.25am

Quote Willo at 06 Mar 2015 10.23am

I note that you reside in Woldingham.

'Surrey East' constituency - solid Conservative seat !

Yes, very strong constituency here - but again, i do not wish for that to sway my vote.


If you plan to vote Tory fine - otherwise vote for a party that will bring in proportional representation, otherwise your vote is as wasted as is Tory's in Scotland.

If you genuinely want an alternative view (certainly from the very right wing leaning LBC) read Noam Chomsky.

 
Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 7 of 10 < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > General election 15: First time Voter!