I'll put that fiver in the post CE

I agree on the training and education but those won't have a multiplier effect for years, and when you've been mismanaged into a situation whereby you struggle to afford years, we go round in circles. Red, blue, red, blue, something else Clegg was right about on ITVs 2010 debate.

Healthcare won't accelerate growth very much.

COYP

Ha glad you're enjoying it! I admit I like the debate. It's also given me a chance to read some interesting articles from different perspectives. FYI I used to be a conservative party member back in 2005 when I turned 18 but since studying economics at university and entering the world of work and generally reading more about politics and economics I have gradually changed my opinion to be much more closely aligned with socialist principles and new Keynesian economic thinking. I find it to be much more holistic, realistic and takes into account market inefficiencies and the irrationality of people as economic agents. I would implore everyone reading this thread to read Stiglitz's articles on inequality. I have dug out this opinion piece by Krugman which was written prior to the last election about austerity [Link]

It's excellent.

I think most parties when they get elected are more interested in their own voters, and maintaining their hold over swing voters, than in either their core or non-voters.

I don't think the Conservatives are notably evil, just as self interested as the Labour party were in retaining the swing votes. Cameron's conservative party weren't too radical or different from Blair's Labour party.

And that's the problem, politics and government is more about 'popularity' than actually engaging in direct social issues, and change. Both had a hard on crime approach that was contradictory to all evidence from criminal justice and rehabilitation research - because it played well in the media and with voters.

Likely, the Conservatives, like labour, direct policy and spending towards programs that will get good coverage and keep them in power, even if they're not reasonably sound in terms of results.

Welfare is the classic example, neither side has ever really managed to make a marked difference in welfare, because neither side is willing to make very tough decisions and implement programs aimed at resolving things like long term unemployment, poverty etc because these are a) long term projects b) very expensive c) unpopular with middle of the roads voters d) would likely require taxation rises.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

On what do you base that assertion?

That's not what he said, is it?

"Aligned with socialist principles" he said. A la Norway and other forward-looking countries.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

I know a number of people who work in the Treasury, none of whom agree with his economic policies. He has a degree in PPE which is "econoimcs lite". He's far less qualified an economist than others I've previously mentioned.

No, i don't. Check out Kerala. 50 years of very left-wing success. Highest literacy rates in India, well-being good, etc. All relative, of course, but if you had been born not well off in India in the 1950's you would probably have wanted to be born there.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

A healthier workforce is much more productive though...

Mental health as important as physical health in that.

Kerala? Is that a country? Any success examples that we might have heard of?

We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell]