Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    i think there is an impending revolt. I'd be shocked if this coalition lasts for a year more, Clegg doesn't seemed to have even tried to impose any of his policies on the Tories. Maybe the shift in the polls will allow him to force through more of what he wants, since the thought of an election at this stage will surely sour the taste in Dave's mouth.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    The British public voted the Labour Party into government in the 2005 General Election.We had a mandate to govern until summer 2010.
    24% of the electorate voted for Labour in the 2005 election... hardly a mandate?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Labour supporters are all pretending to like Ed, but he is more Adams family than electable prime minister. Let's face it, he is the unacceptable face of the unions in this country - people have had enough of paying idiots doing jobs 12 year olds could do twice the salary they get in private employment. When the Tories change the boundaries for seats Labour will become a distant bad memory.
    IFS study found that public sector workers are paid, including pensions, only between 2% and 7% more than comparable private sector jobs. Sorry to disappoint you with, you know, facts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    The argument that Ed's victory is illegitimate because it is down to the Trade Unions is absolute drivel....nothing less than what I would expect from the Tory media.
    Yes, because everyone that disagrees with Labour is a tory. :rolleyes:

    The Labour Party was founded by the Trade Unions. The Trade Union form part of the Labour Party. A TU vote is just as valid as a member's vote or an MP's vote, as set out in the Labour Party constitution.
    And I completely disagree with the idea of a trade union having that much power in a poltical party, which is what puts me (and a massive amount of other people) off Labour so much. And I say that as the son of a union member, because the POA (admittedly Prison Officers aren't allowed to have unions, but it is a union in everything but name) are a bunch of arrogant children. I also disagree with the idea of a labour MP's vote having 600x (or whatever the ridiculous number is) the power of a labour member's vote. The ordinary labour member should be given more power and not overuled by MPs and (in this case) affiliates, it's undemocratic otherwise.

    That being said, this crap about moral mandates is all subjective, becuase morality has a habit of being like that. So please stop calling for Mr Cameron to call an election when he has a constitutional mandate to govern, just like Ed Miliband has a constitutional mandate to run Labour irrespective of whether or not I think he has a moral one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamesr30)
    Have a look at some economic data from around the world, GDP growth rates, taxation, unemployment – and why these things are the case. Notice the trend of higher taxes and bigger state = more unemployment, slow growth and less wealth.
    *citation needed

    Honestly used to agree with this sentiment but actually by most of the measures you've stated, neo-liberal and free-market policies have been less successful than active industrial policy, market interventionism, and targetted welfare spending (a strong safety net encourages risk taking--i.e. German style).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    The coalition is doomed to collapse within the next couple of years. You don't seem to realise that you are dealing with the greatest political mind on TSR. I give it two years, max.

    I give Ed Milliband two years then hell be chucked out by the Labour Party . Labour are finished they ****** the country up for 13 years and there is no way the are coming back until Every Single New Labour Politicians is out and Labour elect a Leader who will not ignore the Deficit

    As for the Lib Dems always do bad outside in between elections and If Lib Dems had joined Labour they would be just as bad probably worse as by now The Pound wouldve collapsed as Gordon Brown would be looking over his shoulder for Tony Blair

    Lib Dems have not sold out on principles they had more in Common with the Conservatives on Deficit Policy,Freedom Laws,Welfare Reform, Foreign Policy

    Even Tony Blair wanted to reform welfare but Gordon Brown wouldnt let him
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mynameisq)
    But what Steve public understands is, the severity of the cuts could end up being detrimental to a proper recovery, and the cuts will damage peoples lives more so than is necessary, just to reduce the deficit as fast as possible. So yes they are necessary and yes it was Labours fault, but the severity of cuts in such a small time will only end up harming the country in my opinion. Btw Joe public are idiots.
    Apparently the IMF disagrees, and it is very rare for them to comment on government policy in any country.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    4 and a half years is a long long time. A lot can and will change. Don't get too excited.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Keckers)
    Apparently the IMF disagrees, and it is very rare for them to comment on government policy in any country.
    Untrue.The IMF has a history of supporting damaging fiscal retrenchment (read: Asian Crisis, Thatcher's retrenchment). I certainly wouldn't discount their judgement but it has historically done just as much if not more harm than good.

    The OECD have been much more cautious and have said that the approach of governments around the world needs to be flexible to market conditions. Read Ed Ball's Bloomberg speech for a different perspective of the historical realities surrounding this type of retrenchment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Labour in the last 12 months of its Government purposely increased spending and made unfunded promises to make life for Difficult for the Coalition Government
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    the left cannot just criticise the coalition, but rather they should accept that it has made an inconspicuous yet orderly start in adverse and difficult economic (and initially, political) circumstances. They have put aside tribalism and petty ping-pong politics for the greater good. The country has welcomed this 'new' politics and the inward looking, traditional nature of Ed Miliband's leaders speech today suggests it will be along time before this changes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Labour only policy is lets chuck money and Blame thatcher for everything
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RK)
    You seem to forget that Labour planned some cuts - sensible levels of cuts that would not damage people and the country like the Tory cuts that the Lib Dems are allowing to happen will do. Cut too hard and too fast and you reduced the amount of money out there being spent, this in turn reduced confidence and causes businesses to reduced their spending and leads to people having less to spend, people being made unemployed and the Government spending more on benefits to support the extra unemployed.

    But cut sensibly at the right time and you don't damage confidence, don't make massively more unemployed, don't increase your spending by as much on benefits and so you get back to a stage where your economy is growing well much quicker and you can more afford to make spending cuts to reduce the deficit over a longer period and also reduce the deficit as a perentage of your GDP as a result of the increased growth.

    People will be sorry when they see the extent of the spending cuts next month. We're alreayd know we're going to be losing thousands of police. Sussex alone has announcements 1000 job cuts in the police with half of these expected to be officers. Similar cuts will happen in all areas of the country for all types of public sector workers.
    Yes, cuts at the right time are vital. But we've gone past the 'right' time. Labour let that pass and did nothing. They saw the way the global economy was heading. They could see how far in the black we were. They did nothing.

    So it's left to the Conservatives to make the right cuts at an inopertune time. Their cuts may seem drastic, but they are no more than what's needed. They're backed by the IMF.

    Shall we see in 2 years? If we go into a double dip then I'll eat my words. But I highly doubt I'll be dining on such :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IKnowSoMuch!!)
    The country has welcomed this 'new' politics and the inward looking, traditional nature of Ed Miliband's leaders speech today suggests it will be along time before this changes.

    "We must not blame the electorate for ending up with a government we don't like, we should blame ourselves.

    We have to understand why people felt they couldn't support us.

    We have to show we understand the problems people face today.

    This will require strong leadership. It won't always be easy. You might not always like what I have to say.

    ...

    The hard truth for all of us in this hall is that a party that started out taking on old thinking became the prisoner of its own certainties.

    The world was changing all around us - from global finance to immigration to terrorism - New Labour, a political force founded on its ability to adapt and change lost its ability to do so.

    The reason was that we too often bought old, established ways of thinking and over time we just looked more and more like a new establishment.

    Let me say to the country:

    You saw the worst financial crisis in a generation, and I understand your anger that Labour hadn't changed the old ways in the City of deregulation.

    You wanted your concerns about the impact of immigration on communities to be heard, and I understand your frustration that we didn't seem to be on your side.

    And when you wanted to make it possible for your kids to get on in life, I understand why you felt that we were stuck in old thinking about higher and higher levels of personal debt, including tuition fees.

    You saw jobs disappear and economic security undermined, I understand your anger at a Labour government that claimed it could end boom and bust.

    And I understand also that the promise of new politics of 1997 came to look incredibly hollow after the scandal of MPs' expenses. And we came to look like a new establishment in the company we kept, the style of our politics and our remoteness from people.

    I stand before you, clear in my task: to once again make Labour a force that takes on established thinking, doesn't succumb to it, speaks for the majority and shapes the centre ground of politics.

    ...

    Let me say, I believe strongly that we need to reduce the deficit.

    There will be cuts, and there would have been if we had been in government.

    Some of them will be painful, and would have been if we were in government.

    I won't oppose every cut the coalition proposes.

    There will be some things the coalition does that we won't like as a party but we will have to support.

    And come the next election there will be some things they have done that I'll want to reverse but will not be able to.

    I say this because the fiscal credibility we earned before 1997 was hard won and we must win it back by the time of the next general election.

    I am serious about reducing our deficit.



    Inward looking, traditional nature? For a speech by a new Opposition leader, this is possibly one of the least oppositional I have yet heard. Find one of Cameron's which was less, or one of Clegg's if you will. I think you are entirely premature in making such a judgement.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Philosopher-of-sorts)
    "We must not blame the electorate for ending up with a government we don't like, we should blame ourselves.

    We have to understand why people felt they couldn't support us.

    We have to show we understand the problems people face today.

    This will require strong leadership. It won't always be easy. You might not always like what I have to say.

    ...

    The hard truth for all of us in this hall is that a party that started out taking on old thinking became the prisoner of its own certainties.

    The world was changing all around us - from global finance to immigration to terrorism - New Labour, a political force founded on its ability to adapt and change lost its ability to do so.

    The reason was that we too often bought old, established ways of thinking and over time we just looked more and more like a new establishment.

    Let me say to the country:

    You saw the worst financial crisis in a generation, and I understand your anger that Labour hadn't changed the old ways in the City of deregulation.

    You wanted your concerns about the impact of immigration on communities to be heard, and I understand your frustration that we didn't seem to be on your side.

    And when you wanted to make it possible for your kids to get on in life, I understand why you felt that we were stuck in old thinking about higher and higher levels of personal debt, including tuition fees.

    You saw jobs disappear and economic security undermined, I understand your anger at a Labour government that claimed it could end boom and bust.

    And I understand also that the promise of new politics of 1997 came to look incredibly hollow after the scandal of MPs' expenses. And we came to look like a new establishment in the company we kept, the style of our politics and our remoteness from people.

    I stand before you, clear in my task: to once again make Labour a force that takes on established thinking, doesn't succumb to it, speaks for the majority and shapes the centre ground of politics.

    ...

    Let me say, I believe strongly that we need to reduce the deficit.

    There will be cuts, and there would have been if we had been in government.

    Some of them will be painful, and would have been if we were in government.

    I won't oppose every cut the coalition proposes.

    There will be some things the coalition does that we won't like as a party but we will have to support.

    And come the next election there will be some things they have done that I'll want to reverse but will not be able to.

    I say this because the fiscal credibility we earned before 1997 was hard won and we must win it back by the time of the next general election.

    I am serious about reducing our deficit.



    Inward looking, traditional nature? For a speech by a new Opposition leader, this is possibly one of the least oppositional I have yet heard. Find one of Cameron's which was less, or one of Clegg's if you will. I think you are entirely premature in making such a judgement.
    Its a good speech i must concede...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Philosopher-of-sorts)
    IFS study found that public sector workers are paid, including pensions, only between 2% and 7% more than comparable private sector jobs. Sorry to disappoint you with, you know, facts.
    O, does that take into account the higher job security, or that the private sector demands higher skills and qualifications - not to mention more out put? Perhaps you should work in the NHS back offices for a week before you give these incompetents any praise.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    Also with over 4 years until the next election....
    My earlier post already explains why this probably won't be the case, saying it will definitely happen in over 4 years isn't the best idea as it could come back to bite you.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    O, does that take into account the higher job security, or that the private sector demands higher skills and qualifications - not to mention more out put? Perhaps you should work in the NHS back offices for a week before you give these incompetents any praise.
    Actually, on average the public sector requires higher skills and qualifications, since most of the lowest skill jobs have been outsourced and there is much less large-scale state building schemes than there were in the 70s-90s (and so fewer construction workers). And yes, that was taken into account by the IFS. Actually the average skill level of jobs in the private sector has declined over the last 3 decades as we lost our skilled manufacturing base.

    Those people working in the NHS back offices are, no doubt, more skilled and more qualified than those working in catering and other low-skilled service sector jobs, or the cleaning jobs which the public sector outsourced.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Conservative - 39%

    Labour - 40%

    Yes they have STORMED past havent they? ONE WHOLE PERCENT, thats amazing!!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Teveth is just pathetic. He never replies to any post which is right (ie, against what he says). Which proves that he is wrong.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,582

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.