| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
10 years of Tory austerity that came about as a result of Labour almost bankrupting the Country. People are not stupid, they have longer memories that Corbyn and Starmer gave them credit for. They also realised that in spite of all the hardship caused by the austerity measures, the alternative is a Labour Government who ridiculously wanted to go on a reckless spending spree by borrowing hundreds of billions more.Originally Posted by surge
it was good times though
Blaming Labour solely for what happened in 2008 is just as bonkers as blaming the what's in it for me party for the origin of the pandemic. If the Labour party was responsible for 2008 in any way it was for following deregulatory policies even more enthusiastically than the Thatcher/Major Governments did - the financial crash was down to failures of capitalism and libertarianism as bankers took advantage of freedoms caused by a worldwide roll back of regulation.
Both Conservatives and Labour were united on what to do following the financial crash and I've never heard any tories saying that the y would have not brought in the policies Brown followed that caused the crash because they were were too left wing - they were right of centre policies which caused what happened in 2008.
Coming up to date, goats said I would be upset today because of what's happening so far in the elections because Labour are doing poorly. While I'd say it's disappointing because I've nearly always voted Labour in my life, the truth is that, increasingly, my politics are first and foremost anti Conservative and I haven't voted Labour with any enthusiasm in ages.
In the so called Tory landslide of 2019, there were, rounding down, 47 million people eligible to vote, 14 million, rounding up, of which voted Conservative. Therefore, out of eligible voters, more than two thirds did not vote Conservative. Of course, many of them would have been apathetic tories who were sure their party was going to win and there would have been Conservatives who would not have been able to vote for whatever reason. However, it's clearly true that far more people who had the right to vote did not feel they could vote Conservative than those who did.
With our voting system, that always happens no matter who wins, but, as has been remarked already, with the main opposition party falling into the normal left v right infighting which some in it appear to think is the main reason for its existence, I believe there are an awful lot of people like me, who long for an electable and coherent alternative to the Conservatives that has a realistic chance of winning.
The Labour party became an irrelevance in Scotland and still don't seem to have realised it yet and it's heading towards the same situation in the UK unless it realises that the real enemy are the lot who have formed the Government for almost thirty of the last forty years - if they cannot do that and prefer to continue rowing amongst themselves, then they're not worth saying.
i) I agree Labour party (and centre-left/left as a whole) needs to become more united
ii) Tories have been in power for something like 85 of past 105 years. They're looking to secure that longer term with boundary changes and removal of caps on election spending. The UK is basically a one party-state and it could get much worse.
And almost 70% didn't vote Labour in 2019.
Er, that's why I said "with our voting system, that always happens no matter who wins". Also, with only ten million out of forty seven million eligible votes, Labour would have loved to have got more than thirty per cent of it but it was the what's in it for me party who had "almost 70 per cent" not voting for them.
Dont get your argument. Conservatives got over 42% of vote in 2019, so 58% didn’t vote for them. Labour got over 32% of vote, so 68% didn't vote for them. What does that prove, apart from more people didn't vote for Labour than didn't vote for Conservatives.
I was talking about the eligible vote (including people who didn't vote). Things like the votes to impeach Trump needed a two thirds majority (66 per cent) to be carry and yet both Conservative and Labour Governments have been given what is virtually absolute power when less than one third of the eligible voters have backed them.
Part of Labour's problem is they never fully challenged this utterly bullshit narrative.
Labour's spending did not cause the global financial crisis.
Austerity was not required, it was what the tories wanted.
Other countries didn't pursue an extreme ideological austerity, and emerged from the global financial crisis no differently than the UK, and in some areas the austerity is thought to have delayed the economy recovering.
Because the outgoing Labour government never challenged that the tories were able to inflict horrific austerity on poor areas of the uk, and escape much of the blame for it - the blame falling on "labour spending" or immigration. Which is why we are where we are today.
Thats your opinion but it isn't mine and I suspect isn't the opinion of the millions of voters who have deserted Labour in the last few years. People realise that if you borrow billions of pounds to run a country, even at low rates of interest, at some point the money has to be paid back. How anyone can say austerity measure weren't needed at the time is beyond me but there you go.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
