The Devalued Prime Minister of a Devalued Government

[Gingeletiss]

Point is GLT, I know that JB thinks he is being sarcastic, and maybe a tad "clever", ( whether you agree with him or not is up to you ). Personally, as somebody who spent 16 months unemployed at the height of Maggie T's tenure in Downing Street, I have a contrary opinion on the relative merits of 'casino capitalism' and a Labour government.

 

Again...your opinion, and you're entitled to it. At 55, I know who has done the best for me during my working life, and it ain't the Reds. Under them, if you're a home owner, work hard for a living, obey the Law...you will be royally screw*d......Taxes, they invent them by the dozen.

[Draino76]

Hey, I'm no lover of the finance industry but if banks and insurance companies go bust we're all up sh*t creek!

 

There would be a domino effect and all the banks would go bust and we'd ALL be left with worthless houses, cars etc. etc. Pensions worth even less than they are now. Then we'd nearly all be out of work and it would be even worse than it was when there were over 3million unemployed before.

 

So unemployment benefit payments would rocket, together with OAP pension credits, housing benefit etc. More poor people = poorer health so an increase in demand for health services. And that's just off the top of my head.

 

Dreadful scenario...

 

I want worthless house prices, and I expect most of the UK folks do too.

[View From The Top]

Anyone who thinks the Tories would have done anything different are deluded beyond belief.

 

The simple truth is that no one really has a scooby about how to get us out of the mess started by Bear Sterns and confirmed by Lehman Brothers.

[badgerx16]

. Under them, if you're a home owner, work hard for a living, obey the Law...you will be royally screw*d......Taxes, they invent them by the dozen.

As a home owning, hard working, lawful member of society, I am happy to pay taxes. They help to ensure that the NHS functions, that my kids get educated, that pensioners keep warm in winter, that the roads are maintained, that the 'blue light' services are manned and able to do what we require of them, that children at risk are cared for, etc.

 

( Mind you, they are also currently ensuring that peace and democracy are being delivered to the people of Iraq & Afghanistan. :confused:)

[Johnny Bognor]

 

( Mind you, they are also currently ensuring that peace and democracy are being delivered to the people of Iraq & Afghanistan. :confused:)

 

 

Not to mention, they have and are increasing the gap between rich and poor.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

Sorry, can't resist......Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

[Draino76]

anyone who thinks the tories would have done anything different are deluded beyond belief.

 

The simple truth is that no one really has a scooby about how to get us out of the mess started by bear sterns and confirmed by lehman brothers.

 

lol.

[trousers]

[Gingeletiss]

As a home owning, hard working, lawful member of society, I am happy to pay taxes. They help to ensure that the NHS functions, Not very well that my kids get educated, Not very well that pensioners keep warm in winter, Had to laugh here....not very well that the roads are maintained, Now I'm wetting my pants...I've seen better roads in third world country's that the 'blue light' services are manned and able to do what we require of them, Check out the Fire service and empty stations...Go play 'spot the copper on the beat', a great game this that children at risk are cared for, Failed there as well haven't they etc.

 

( Mind you, they are also currently ensuring that peace and democracy are being delivered to the people of Iraq & Afghanistan. :confused:)

 

One assumes that it was tongue in cheek, as I agree, I'm also happy to pay taxes, to pay for Illegal's to come here and sponge off this nation, to claim free medical treatment, from a system, they have not payed a bean into. To pay for interpreters to sit in classrooms, and help our teachers teach their children. To have poverty on our steets, but still be able to sent billions in overseas aid, to see crime go through the roof, whilst cutting the number of coppers. To see our young soldiers come home in body bags, because of their penny pinching policys..etc etc etc.

[OldNick]

Codswallop!

 

The government needs to bring forward infrastructure projects. The government then sells these contracts to firms who wish to undertake them (such projects could include building schools or insulating all our hospitals). Firms then take on staff to complete these tasks. They also buy raw materials from other firms who provide them. Because of all the projects, more raw materials are needed, so these firms have to hire more staff to look after this, which is covered by the cost of selling more. All these people are now paying tax which helps government coffers.

 

Now, because we have insulated all our hospitals, they spend less on heating and now the NHS isn't spending as much money.

 

There you go. Economy saved!!!

Codswallop eh. Well as i said before if it is that easy why do not every country in the world do it. We up to now can do it because we had the Empire (something many sniff at) That caused tremendous wealth creation a century ago and gave us the standing in the world to build a strong economy.

In the last decade we have given away our gold reseves and many of the gold bars had the Queen Anee cypher on it showing how long it had been stored. The population has borrowed against its property to buy foreign goods, on the back of unrealistic property values.I alsways thought it laughable that we were said to be the 4th richest country in the world , a lot of thatwas based on our property value.We can hardly export it can we.

So all those projectw you mention are done with foreign imported materials and sometimes foreign imported labour.It does not create true wealth just shortterm wealth that then those people go and buy BMW's and Sony tv's. The hospitals save on the heating but then overspend on other waste.I will point to my cousins situation again if you did not read it. She sadly died of cancer a few weeks ago.The social services put in a stannah lift at the cost of £3800 and was used once to take her downstairs to the hospice.It was ripped out and skipped, (she did not die of leprosy were the words of her husband). I relayed the story to someone I know at a housing association and she said that is a common occurance and probably happens 2-3 times a month, as well as more mindboggling wastes of that type.I suppose your arguement is it keeps people in work.

I found it interesting hearing what george Soros had to say about GB, and that was very worrying.Just like the last time when Wilson Healey and Benn went to the IMF with cap in hand.

[OldNick]

Tony Benn is probably one of the most astute politicians of our time.

 

If you ever had attended any of his lectures or read any of his published works / articles you would see that almost everything he has talked about in the past has come to fruition.

 

Nick - you still haven't offered an alternative solution.

 

We're where we are - what does YOUR future offer?

As yes Mr benn, a man of enormous wealth who can afford to be a socialist.I doubt you recall when the Labour government were going to do a wealth tax and he made sure his familllies money was tied up abroad and safe from that happening to him.i think his wife is American if i recall correctly.

98% super tax as well under his time in government, wehere all the wealth flooded out of the country,very astute indeed.

[OldNick]

But what should be done NOW, Nick?

 

What should this country, and all the other western democracies, do NOW to make things better?

 

You mention toxic debt. The government has already addressed this problem by underwriting toxic debt so that the banks, supposedly, will start lending again.

 

Where will this money for banks to lend come from, exactly? Is there a pile of it hidden somewhere? If the man in the street isn't earning money > spending money > adding to some company's profits somewhere > how are the banks going to get money to lend out?

 

It is a vicious circle. Where anyone jumps into it is a matter of conjecture. The more important point is that the circle must keep turning somehow - not put into reverse as some would advocate.

 

So - what should be done NOW, Nick?

I put what should be done now. All the toxic debt should be put into the BOE and the banks pay a fee/ or % of their own debt for 10 years.When it matures in 10 years the econimies would then have recovered enough for the banks to be able to take back those liabilities. Inflation would have lessened the burden on them. By doing it NOW they could feel free to lend to each other again knowing that they all were solvent. Credit card debt would be stopped from being extended and no more approved. the phasing out of credit cards would start and people would have to reduce their liabilites.

unless the population get out of unsustainable debt you are only putting off more strife.

The days you recall of having a jaunt to West Quay and spending because you like the look of the packet or Ikea because the latest fashion is chrome and glass. We are heading for austerity, i dont like it you wont like it the population wont like it but your government took their eye of the road, much like under Wilson.

There is no quick fix of bringing the good days back, and as i put in the post above George Soros I beleive has got it right.

[Fuengirola Saint]

 

That's ironic from the party that presided over record unemployment in the 80's and 90's, i can't believe the barefaced cheek.

[Fuengirola Saint]

As yes Mr benn, a man of enormous wealth who can afford to be a socialist.I doubt you recall when the Labour government were going to do a wealth tax and he made sure his familllies money was tied up abroad and safe from that happening to him.i think his wife is American if i recall correctly.

98% super tax as well under his time in government, wehere all the wealth flooded out of the country,very astute indeed.

 

Can you show me that he hid his families money abroad or did you just make that bit up?

[bridge too far]

Can you show me that he hid his families money abroad or did you just make that bit up?

 

And his wife WAS American - she died in 2000.

[badgerx16]

Originally Posted by badgerx16

As a home owning, hard working, lawful member of society, I am happy to pay taxes. They help to ensure that the NHS functions, Not very well that my kids get educated, Not very well that pensioners keep warm in winter, Had to laugh here....not very well that the roads are maintained, Now I'm wetting my pants...I've seen better roads in third world country's that the 'blue light' services are manned and able to do what we require of them, Check out the Fire service and empty stations...Go play 'spot the copper on the beat', a great game this that children at risk are cared for, Failed there as well haven't they etc.

 

( Mind you, they are also currently ensuring that peace and democracy are being delivered to the people of Iraq & Afghanistan. :confused:)

 

 

One assumes that it was tongue in cheek, as I agree, I'm also happy to pay taxes, to pay for Illegal's to come here and sponge off this nation, to claim free medical treatment, from a system, they have not payed a bean into. To pay for interpreters to sit in classrooms, and help our teachers teach their children. To have poverty on our steets, but still be able to sent billions in overseas aid, to see crime go through the roof, whilst cutting the number of coppers. To see our young soldiers come home in body bags, because of their penny pinching policys..etc etc etc.

 

Firstly, both my wife and I work in the public sector, so taxes pay our salaries . As for education, my daughter has a Master's degree, #1 son is currently studying for his, and #2 son plans to go into medicine :cool:, so thanks to all of you for your gracious contributions; I found the NHS very effective during my recent illness ; My pensioner father-in-law is currently keeping warm by virtue of the fact he is in New Zealand visiting relatives .

 

As for the cheap jibe about Children's Services - for every one that slips through the system, and consequently hits the headlines of a rabid press, there are literally thousands who are capably dealt with, ( and I speak from personal experience on this point ).

 

Where there are possible deficiencies in public services it is likely to be because so many people seem to resent paying tax in the first place, ( heaven forbid any mention of taxes being raised to improve service ), yet complain when they find the level of service they are offered has been cut to suit the amount of funding available.

[bridge too far]

Originally Posted by badgerx16

 

Firstly, both my wife and I work in the public sector, so taxes pay our salaries . As for education, my daughter has a Master's degree, #1 son is currently studying for his, and #2 son plans to go into medicine :cool:, so thanks to all of you for your gracious contributions; I found the NHS very effective during my recent illness ; My pensioner father-in-law is currently keeping warm by virtue of the fact he is in New Zealand visiting relatives .

 

As for the cheap jibe about Children's Services - for every one that slips through the system, and consequently hits the headlines of a rabid press, there are literally thousands who are capably dealt with, ( and I speak from personal experience on this point ).

 

Where there are possible deficiencies in public services it is likely to be because so many people seem to resent paying tax in the first place, ( heaven forbid any mention of taxes being raised to improve service ), yet complain when they find the level of service they are offered has been cut to suit the amount of funding available.

 

In spite of people like us paying our fair share, the real obstacle to improving public services even further is the non-payment of taxes by those bastions of capitalism, the banks and large corporations. They avoid paying their fair shares by putting their money into secretive and / or off-shore banks. Thankfully, governments around the world are starting to address this issue. The Guardian has recently exposed many of these companies.

 

As far as the NHS is concerned, now, for the first time, in every part of the country, nobody has to wait more than 18 weeks for treatment after being referred by their GP, unless they choose to wait longer or there is a good medical reason. Most people wait less than 8 weeks. These are the shortest waiting times since records began.

[revolution saint]

Great thread.

 

A couple of points: One is that people moan about deregulation of the bank of england but at the time it was heralded as giving power back to the people who understand banking better and keeping politicians out of it. What do we want? I'm guessing the people who knock Brown now would have been happy to see less govt intervention.

 

Two: There still seems to be no feasible alternative to spending our way out of recession. Yes, debts will mount up but the alternative is financial meltdown. Nickh proposed the govt taking on the toxic debts of banks - I'm fairly sure that's already been proposed by the govt anyway.

[OldNick]

Can you show me that he hid his families money abroad or did you just make that bit up?

His wife being American had their wealth transferred there.I was only in my early teens then but there was a furore then about it.Im not saying he hid it, he protected it, thats what very wealthy people can do.he also got rid of his peerage (?) , it doesn't sit well when you are with the great unwashed he found.

Champagne socialists are the worst kind Imo, always talk a good game but still enbjoy the perks of power and wealth.I find it hypocritical.having saying that he is a very bright person.

Give it all away if you believe in all being equal.

[bridge too far]

Great thread.

 

A couple of points: One is that people moan about deregulation of the bank of england but at the time it was heralded as giving power back to the people who understand banking better and keeping politicians out of it. What do we want? I'm guessing the people who knock Brown now would have been happy to see less govt intervention.

 

Two: There still seems to be no feasible alternative to spending our way out of recession. Yes, debts will mount up but the alternative is financial meltdown. Nickh proposed the govt taking on the toxic debts of banks - I'm fairly sure that's already been proposed by the govt anyway.

 

I think that's the case, too RS. In fact, I already pointed that out to Nick when asking him for HIS solution to the problem. He just came back with the idea again. I don't think he realises that this IS happening.

 

So I'm still waiting for his alternatives - the ones that haven't already been undertaken.

 

I was interested to read today that the Conservatives are distancing themselves from this MEP. He's an embarrassment to them, apparently.

[OldNick]

Great thread.

 

A couple of points: One is that people moan about deregulation of the bank of england but at the time it was heralded as giving power back to the people who understand banking better and keeping politicians out of it. What do we want? I'm guessing the people who knock Brown now would have been happy to see less govt intervention.

 

Two: There still seems to be no feasible alternative to spending our way out of recession. Yes, debts will mount up but the alternative is financial meltdown. Nickh proposed the govt taking on the toxic debts of banks - I'm fairly sure that's already been proposed by the govt anyway.

I can see where you are coming from but on the other hand you have to deregulate responsibly. To let bankers oversee themselves is always going to be asking for trouble, the same would be if you let any profession with the access to massive bonusses.

Your second point is correct to some degree, banks can voluntarily go forward and let the bank take the debts but they basically lose their independance.

The way i see it is that they keep their independance but also free themselves to get on with running their business with each othe as it has always been done.of course it is hard to tell how much toxic debt there is but taking it from the banks for 10 years will give them time to breathe and at the same time time will erode the problem.Yes we as taxpayers will still feel some of the burden but we will get that anyway.

[OldNick]

I think that's the case, too RS. In fact, I already pointed that out to Nick when asking him for HIS solution to the problem. He just came back with the idea again. I don't think he realises that this IS happening.

 

So I'm still waiting for his alternatives - the ones that haven't already been undertaken.

 

I was interested to read today that the Conservatives are distancing themselves from this MEP. He's an embarrassment to them, apparently.

BTF as i have explained it is different from what is happening already, only LLoyds and Hbos have taken full advantage of the BOE scheme.

I dont think you should keep trying to discrediting my posts.Benns wife was American and i was talking about when Labour were last in power and so posting in the present. You still did not answer my points to you but move on and hope people dont notice.

I also have put my solutions to the problem but as they dont fit in with throwing money at the problem you ignore it.George Soros a man of far greater financial knowledge than us has given his views today and perhaps you should sit back and digest his words because they are very worrying if they come true.

[badgerx16]

George Soros a man of far greater financial knowledge than us has given his views today and perhaps you should sit back and digest his words because they are very worrying if they come true.

Is this the same George Soros who screwed us over so royally on 'Black Wednesday' ? A true grabbing capitalist b4stard if ever there was one.

[bridge too far]

BTF as i have explained it is different from what is happening already, only LLoyds and Hbos have taken full advantage of the BOE scheme.

I dont think you should keep trying to discrediting my posts.Benns wife was American and i was talking about when Labour were last in power and so posting in the present. You still did not answer my points to you but move on and hope people dont notice.

I also have put my solutions to the problem but as they dont fit in with throwing money at the problem you ignore it.George Soros a man of far greater financial knowledge than us has given his views today and perhaps you should sit back and digest his words because they are very worrying if they come true.

 

I must have asked you three or four times yesterday for your alternative solution. The only one you came up with was one that was already in train.

 

Pots & kettles, mate. Pots & kettles.

[OldNick]

I must have asked you three or four times yesterday for your alternative solution. The only one you came up with was one that was already in train.

 

Pots & kettles, mate. Pots & kettles.

But it isnt already in train, its different.The cutting of individual debt and stopping some of the government spending plans are not either.

The best brains in the world are trying to find different ideas so why you think I should have them is another thing.GB didnt think what we have now it was a whizz kid who thought it up.My questions to you have still not even been addressed. Do you now accept that taking the regulations away from the BOE was a mistake?

You tried even to blame Thatcher yesterday and then wax lyrical about Wedgewood Benn.

Intelligent man he is visionary he is not.

BTF I read 'Callaghan allowed Benn to put forward his "alternative economic strategy", which consisted of a siege economy. However this plan was rejected by the Cabinet.' Do you know what the siege economy was it's something I have never heard of before?

Edited 28 March, 2009 by OldNick

[revolution saint]

I can see where you are coming from but on the other hand you have to deregulate responsibly. To let bankers oversee themselves is always going to be asking for trouble, the same would be if you let any profession with the access to massive bonusses.

Your second point is correct to some degree, banks can voluntarily go forward and let the bank take the debts but they basically lose their independance.

The way i see it is that they keep their independance but also free themselves to get on with running their business with each othe as it has always been done.of course it is hard to tell how much toxic debt there is but taking it from the banks for 10 years will give them time to breathe and at the same time time will erode the problem.Yes we as taxpayers will still feel some of the burden but we will get that anyway.

 

You're contradicting yourself a bit there. On the one hand you say that letting bankers oversee themselves is asking for trouble and on the other you say we should just take their debt for ten years and let them get on with it. As I understand one of the conditions for taking the debt is making sure that credit is freed up and the economy can function. That's not asking for much is it? The alternative is we take the debt and the money goes on bonuses and dividends. Let's face it bankers don't have a great track record here do they.

[OldNick]

You're contradicting yourself a bit there. On the one hand you say that letting bankers oversee themselves is asking for trouble and on the other you say we should just take their debt for ten years and let them get on with it. As I understand one of the conditions for taking the debt is making sure that credit is freed up and the economy can function. That's not asking for much is it? The alternative is we take the debt and the money goes on bonuses and dividends. Let's face it bankers don't have a great track record here do they.

No Im not contradicting it probably is done to my poor way of explaining my thoughtsWhat is stopping the banks lending is that they have to make their books balance and so lend from other banks.Otherbanks are worried to lend to each other as they are not sure of each others postion, therefore they dont want to lend to a bank who then go wobbly, they then in turn may be so due to losing that money.I hope you get my drift.If all the toxic debt from all the banks are depositied at the BOe they all know the position and so they then can be confident to lend to each other and so in turn lend to the greater economy. i am very much agianst the bonusses, the dividends are different. The dividends are paid to shareholders who are mainly pension companies the man in the street. they by investing by buying shares are in a way loaning and so expect a return on their money.if they got nothing back they may as well leave it in the building society and so the companies would be starved of money and would never have expanded in the first place.

[bridge too far]

But it isnt already in train, its different.The cutting of individual debt and stopping some of the government spending plans are not either.

The best brains in the world are trying to find different ideas so why you think I should have them is another thing.GB didnt think what we have now it was a whizz kid who thought it up.My questions to you have still not even been addressed. Do you now accept that taking the regulations away from the BOE was a mistake?

You tried even to blame Thatcher yesterday and then wax lyrical about Wedgewood Benn.

Intelligent man he is visionary he is not.

BTF I read 'Callaghan allowed Benn to put forward his "alternative economic strategy", which consisted of a siege economy. However this plan was rejected by the Cabinet.' Do you know what the siege economy was it's something I have never heard of before?

 

I referred you to this:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-thatchers-baleful-influence-lives-on-760508.html

 

which describes well the 'influence' Thatcher and Reagan had in deregulating the Finance industry. Perhaps you haven't had time to read it yet?

 

I don't quite get your connection between 'blaming Thatcher' and 'waxing lyrical' about Tony Benn (he renounced the Wedgewood bit in the 70s - he had to campaign to be allowed to do this). What point are you trying to make here?

[revolution saint]

No Im not contradicting it probably is done to my poor way of explaining my thoughtsWhat is stopping the banks lending is that they have to make their books balance and so lend from other banks.Otherbanks are worried to lend to each other as they are not sure of each others postion, therefore they dont want to lend to a bank who then go wobbly, they then in turn may be so due to losing that money.I hope you get my drift.If all the toxic debt from all the banks are depositied at the BOe they all know the position and so they then can be confident to lend to each other and so in turn lend to the greater economy. i am very much agianst the bonusses, the dividends are different. The dividends are paid to shareholders who are mainly pension companies the man in the street. they by investing by buying shares are in a way loaning and so expect a return on their money.if they got nothing back they may as well leave it in the building society and so the companies would be starved of money and would never have expanded in the first place.

 

Well OK with the dividend part but just taking on debt without guarantee? If we (the taxpayer) are underwriting this debt then isn't it fair we get something back? Can you imagine the fall out if it failed? It's a good idea that we take on the debt but you seem to be suggesting we just take their debt. Apologies if I've got that wrong.

 

A lot of people bashing Brown at the moment have said that bailing out the banks has achieved nothing - I can't see the public going with a plan to give them more with nothing in return.

[Mole]

 

10 years of a Socialism and i think the lesson has been learnt by another generation.

[bridge too far]

 

10 years of a Socialism and i think the lesson has been learnt by another generation.

 

We haven't had 10 years of Socialism. We've had 12 years of a Labour government.

 

HTH

[revolution saint]

 

10 years of a Socialism and i think the lesson has been learnt by another generation.

 

In what way has it been 10 years of socialism? Has there been any plans for nationalisation? (forget the banks that was forced by the collapse of the free market and is temporary), has equality of outcome replace equality of opportunity? In what way since 1997 have we had socialism? You can argue poor government if you like but one thing it isn't is socialism.

[bridge too far]

BTF as i have explained it is different from what is happening already, only LLoyds and Hbos have taken full advantage of the BOE scheme.

I dont think you should keep trying to discrediting my posts.Benns wife was American and i was talking about when Labour were last in power and so posting in the present. You still did not answer my points to you but move on and hope people dont notice.

I also have put my solutions to the problem but as they dont fit in with throwing money at the problem you ignore it.George Soros a man of far greater financial knowledge than us has given his views today and perhaps you should sit back and digest his words because they are very worrying if they come true.

 

I just did. He said the economies of the past 25 years have been flawed and that they need to be restructured as they must not go back to how they were.

 

So that's 13 years of the Conservatives and 12 years of Labour by my reckoning.

[Johnny Bognor]

In what way has it been 10 years of socialism? .

 

...and therein lies the problem.

 

Those in the labour party prior to being elected would be described as socialists - which is why the socialists rejoiced when they got into power. However, once they had a taste of being at the top, they threw out their socialist principles and well and truly got their snouts in the trough, with their me me me attitude.

 

A good example of this was Prescott, the champion of the left, who is impartial to a game or two of croquet! (not to mention the number of Labour cabinet ministers who send their kids to private school and are taking the mick with their expense claims). Ultimately, human nature takes over and it is every man for himself.

 

I mean, look at this load of old guff - http://www.labour.org.uk/home

 

The entire front page of their website is devoted to attacking the tories. If they put half as much effort into running the country, than lining their pockets or attacking the tories, perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess. They are in power and CAN do something, but instead they focus on the tories - I thought they were "just getting on with the job".

 

From a business perspective:

Business Rates will be going up at a rate of 5%

The Business Rate Revaluation has been brought forward to this year - which means only one thing

Employers NI will be going up next year (yes, that's right - a tax on employment)

 

Can any of the socialists on here explain how this is going to help the wealth creators (small and medium sized businesses), who will dig us out of this mess?

 

My view is, it is no surprise, when the Chancellor for the last 10 years thought there would be no more boom and bust. If he honestly thought that, he should be sectioned and locked away for his (and our) safety. If he didn't truly believe this, then he is a liar or completely negligent and must take full responsibility for his part in the credit based consumer spending boom that he encouraged. In fact using that phrase, he gave people false confidence and has personally contributed to the mess we are now in.

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

Edited 29 March, 2009 by Johnny Bognor

[Fuengirola Saint]

His wife being American had their wealth transferred there.I was only in my early teens then but there was a furore then about it.Im not saying he hid it, he protected it, thats what very wealthy people can do.he also got rid of his peerage (?) , it doesn't sit well when you are with the great unwashed he found.

Champagne socialists are the worst kind Imo, always talk a good game but still enbjoy the perks of power and wealth.I find it hypocritical.having saying that he is a very bright person.

Give it all away if you believe in all being equal.

 

You haven't shown me that he moved his money to the USA you have just said it again, can you find me reputable online source? It has to be on the internet, He got rid of his peerage in 1963 because he was unable to be an MP with a peerage.

[Johnny Bognor]

Hey Fuengirola,

 

Look what I found......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-487528/Exposed-How-Alistair-Darling-Tony-Benn-exploited-death-tax-loophole.html

 

and as we're talking about moving money to avoid tax, the guy responsible does this.....

 

Lord Myners hid his money in tax haven

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5993185.ece

 

 

...meanwhile we're all paying for this.....

 

Adult movies put on expenses

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5995499.ece

 

 

These guys just get better and better!

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

Edited 29 March, 2009 by Johnny Bognor

[badgerx16]

Hey Fuengirola,

 

Look what I found......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-487528/Exposed-How-Alistair-Darling-Tony-Benn-exploited-death-tax-loophole.html

 

and as we're talking about moving money to avoid tax, the guy responsible does this.....

 

Lord Myners hid his money in tax haven

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5993185.ece

 

 

...meanwhile we're all paying for this.....

 

Adult movies put on expenses

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5995499.ece

 

 

These guys just get better and better!

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

 

 

Johnny boy, I simply can't be bothered to find an equivalent list of Tory misdeeds. The reality is that they are ALL at the trough. And I will leave you with the one over-riding ugly picture from the Conservatives...

 

No matter what nu-Labour get up to, I challenge anybody to come up with anything more sickening than the thought of that champion of 'family values', John Major, in bed with Edwina Curry. :vom::vom::vom:

[Johnny Bognor]

Johnny boy, I simply can't be bothered to find an equivalent list of Tory misdeeds. The reality is that they are ALL at the trough. And I will leave you with the one over-riding ugly picture from the Conservatives...

 

I agree, but you wouldn't expect it from the socialists with their high and mighty moral highground values. This current lot did stand on an anti-sleaze ticket.

 

No matter what nu-Labour get up to, I challenge anybody to come up with anything more sickening than the thought of that champion of 'family values', John Major, in bed with Edwina Curry. :vom::vom::vom:

 

Granted, the thought of it is pretty appalling and I doubt that even Jacqui Smith could justify the tax payer funding the viewing of that movie - having said that it would probably be classed as a horror movie.

Edited 29 March, 2009 by Johnny Bognor

[Mole]

they threw out their socialist principles and well and truly got their snouts in the trough, with their me me me attitude.

 

A good example of this was Prescott

 

Don't get me started on this ignorant, fat lump of sh+t. I really despise the **** with a passion. He is the epitamy of Socialism - all comradey on the outside, but behind the facade all the greasy lardarse cares about is himself.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Don't get me started on this ignorant, fat lump of sh+t. I really despise the **** with a passion. He is the epitamy of Socialism - all comradey on the outside, but behind the facade all the greasy lardarse cares about is himself.

 

Isn't that all you Tories care about? Yourselves, you should be looking at Prescott with admiration.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Hey Fuengirola,

 

Look what I found......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-487528/Exposed-How-Alistair-Darling-Tony-Benn-exploited-death-tax-loophole.html

 

and as we're talking about moving money to avoid tax, the guy responsible does this.....

 

Lord Myners hid his money in tax haven

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5993185.ece

 

 

...meanwhile we're all paying for this.....

 

Adult movies put on expenses

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5995499.ece

 

 

These guys just get better and better!

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

 

And as for Jackie Smith and the rest of this government, don't get me started, i had high hopes in 1997 but that has been all but destroyed by this bunch of middle class career politicians. That goes for both parties as well, though the Tories have always been career politicians.

[Mole]

Isn't that all you Tories care about? Yourselves, you should be looking at Prescott with admiration.

 

I don't vote Tory, i vote UKIP or BNP.

[bridge too far]

And as for Jackie Smith and the rest of this government, don't get me started, i had high hopes in 1997 but that has been all but destroyed by this bunch of middle class career politicians. That goes for both parties as well, though the Tories have always been career politicians.

 

 

Don't forget though Fuengirola, that JB reckons they're socialists

 

To put the record straight:

 

1. Jackie Smith's husband has apologised for booking the porno movies. His wife wasn't even at home when he watched them. Difficult to see how she can be blamed for her husband's actions. As soon as she knew, she paid the money back. I suppose you could blame her for having a stupid husband though

 

2. Tony McNulty, who had sought advice and permission to claim his second home expenses, claimed £60,000 but this was over 7 years - less than 10 grand a year. I'm not making excuses for him, just seeking to put the facts rather than the fiction.

 

3. Today, Mark Field, a Tory MP, admitted that there were a number of Tory MPs also abusing the system, which he said undermined parliament's reputation.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7970731.stm

[bridge too far]

I don't vote Tory, i vote UKIP or BNP.

 

:shock:

 

No! Really? I AM surprised

[Johnny Bognor]

Don't forget though Fuengirola, that JB reckons they're socialists

 

1. Jackie Smith's husband has apologised for booking the porno movies. His wife wasn't even at home when he watched them. Difficult to see how she can be blamed for her husband's actions. As soon as she knew, she paid the money back. I suppose you could blame her for having a stupid husband though

 

Was this the second home that she never went to, expensed by the taxpayer, or her other home which she wasn't at because she thought she had better stay in her expensed house for a while? :-)

 

As for Tony Benn, avoiding inheritence tax, he is almost the grand father of the socialists - total hypocrite, just like the rest.

 

I am not saying the tories don't do these things, they just don't preach in a righteous fashion like the socialists do. The current govt may not be socialist anymore, but there were at one point, which makes them the most hypocitcal of all.

 

HTH

 

Oh sorry, forgot....

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

Edited 29 March, 2009 by Johnny Bognor
Forgot to add Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

[bridge too far]

Was this the second home that she never went to, expensed by the taxpayer, or her other home which she wasn't at because she thought she had better stay in her expensed house for a while? :-)

 

As for Tony Benn, avoiding inheritence tax, he is almost the grand father of the socialists - total hypocrite, just like the rest.

 

I am not saying the tories don't do these things, they just don't preach in a righteous fashion like the socialists do. The current govt may not be socialist anymore, but there were at one point, which makes them the most hypocitcal of all.

 

HTH

 

Oh sorry, forgot....

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

 

Remind me when the government was socialist? Not in my lifetime, that's for sure.

 

And the Tories aren't? Just heard David Chameleon today talking about the merits of 'society' - is this the same 'society' that Thatcher denied the existence of?

[Mole]

Was this the second home that she never went to, expensed by the taxpayer, or her other home which she wasn't at because she thought she had better stay in her expensed house for a while? :-)

 

As for Tony Benn, avoiding inheritence tax, he is almost the grand father of the socialists - total hypocrite, just like the rest.

 

I am not saying the tories don't do these things, they just don't preach in a righteous fashion like the socialists do. The current govt may not be socialist anymore, but there were at one point, which makes them the most hypocitcal of all.

 

HTH

 

Oh sorry, forgot....

 

Go Labour! Socialism Rocks!

 

IMO New Labour are more comunist than Socialist. The whole ethos of the party is to take money out of peoples pockets by putting up taxes so they can dictate how the money is spent.

[badgerx16]

IMO New Labour are more comunist than Socialist. The whole ethos of the party is to take money out of peoples pockets by putting up taxes so they can dictate how the money is spent.

 

I just thank God that neither of the two parties you have espoused allegiance to will ever get into power, so we will never see the Jews, Gypsies, and gays being rounded up and corralled in this country, nor "unauthorised" books burnt on massive bonfires, nor only 'party approved' music being listened to.

 

( Mind you, even the Nazis started out as the National SOCIALIST party ).

[badgerx16]

 

I am not saying the tories don't do these things, they just don't preach in a righteous fashion like the socialists do.

 

I think you might be a just a teeny weeny bit wrong there :

 

http://fairdealphil.blogspot.com/2008/07/anti-sleaze-rules-come-back-to-haunt.html

 

http://www.richardcorbett.org.uk/blog/2008/07/tory-revolt-against-camerons-anti.html

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-512517/QUENTIN-LETTS-Full-throttle-Cameron-seizes-moral-high-ground-bags-anti-sleaze.html

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/06/07/anti-sleaze-tory-caroline-spelman-put-nanny-on-expenses-115875-20598477/

 

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-16675575.html

 

etc, etc, etc

 

Socialism Rocks ! Monetarism Sucks !

[revolution saint]

Why do people assume that being rich and having socialist leanings are mutually exclusive? If you've made a bit but believe in a society where the rich pay more so that the gap in inequality is narrower then why does that make you a hypocrite? You'd be arguing that everyone who earns over a certain amount should pay more - it doesn't mean just individuals who feel so inclined.

 

I don't want to get involved in a debate over whether socialism is a good idea or not - that's irrelevant. Just interested to see why anyone who is rich and a lefty is branded a hypocrite.

[bridge too far]

Spot on (again) RS.

 

Many 'wealthy (and not-so-wealthy) socialists' would say that, actually, they would want everyone to have the opportunities they've had and to be able to enjoy the things they enjoy.

 

That's hardly hypocrisy, now is it