Waiting with interest
"This novice is waiting with interest to see how that novice performs". So said David Cameron at last night's launch of americaintheworld.com (a new anti anti-American campaign).
Thus the Tory leader made his claim to be the first British politician to seek to turn the expected result of today's US election to his own advantage.
Standby for Gordon Brown to cite an Obama victory (if it comes*) as evidence of a resurgence of the centre-left and a victory for belief in the role of the state, internationalism and global co-operation.
No matter that the Labour leadership originally threw their weight behind Hillary Clinton and the argument that it was experience that counts. No matter that the Conservative leadership hailed John McCain when he came to speak at their party conference or that both parties embraced the Bush foreign policy that Obama has run so hard against.
Everyone will want to be seen to be the new guy's best friend. This election will have profound implications for Britain not just in terms of policy but in shaping the national mood.
* With memories of Neil Kinnock being proclaimed our next prime minister in 1992 and with due reverence to the act of voting you'll note that I'm staying cautious about proclaiming the result before it's actually known.
I'm 
© MMX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~15~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I always find it funny when people refer to left wing politics in the
USA. Both parties are substantially to the right of the UK mainstream
parties over hear ("right wing and even more right wing" as one of my
friends living overseas told me). With that in mind I don't understand
why there is this automatic assumption that Tory's support the GOP and
Labour the Democrats.
I've been surprised at the number of politicians that have made their
preference known this time round. As a lowly pleb I can safely hold a
view but politicians have to work with whoever wins in the end.
Backing the wrong horse early on could damage that relationship.
Complain about this comment
I don'tknow what Gordon Brown is up to, so can hardly say what his behaviour will do to take friends in Washington. His journey to Saudi Arabia to find money to prop up British banks, involved shaking hands with Al Quieda 'sympathisers' who were locked up for six years. I wonder what Obama and McCann think of this behaviour?
Complain about this comment
mr cameron should look more closely at the american system there the people vote a leader and by default a party, it has happened here in recent years with presidential blair and look at the cost to this country we here seem to vote party and the party chooses the leader so joe public has no real say as to who is incharge.
if this countries politics is headed down the same road as the us where are the funds going to come from to fight these elections.
our system is flawed but to americanise it would be disaster.
i cannot see mr cameron in government unless the party changes some of there policies, and can this country survive another term of neu labour? i think not so its left to one organisation to step up to the plate and govern us wisely.
the official monster raving loony party.
Complain about this comment
Dear Nick
Whatever the outcome tonight there will be a novice in the White House. And whoever it is their global economic policy will be modelled by that, err ...prudent voice of experience in No.10 Downing Street. Dream on Mr Cameron.
Peter Kenyon
http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/
Complain about this comment
OK, time for a pedantic niggle. Has anyone noticed a recent tendency (maybe just an online thing) for words to be run together?
"Standby for Gordon Brown..." should of course read "Stand by for Gordon Brown..."
Complain about this comment
Our politicians will suck up to whoever it takes in the US elections. I'm sure that Mr Brown will want to be the first to be jump on the bandwagon with America's new President.
Complain about this comment
We are all fascinated watching the people of another country choose its leader - mainly because this process is something that the people of this country have not been able to take part in themselves to choose the leader of our countries.
Complain about this comment
Good points by Nick pointing out the usual blatant hypocracy from both Labour and the Tories.
'Dave' might well be trying to catch a bit of the Obama stardust by positioning himself as a 'novice'.
However, I suspect most English voters will see 'Dave' for what he really represents ... a continuation of hundreds of years of a born-to-rule elite.
Complain about this comment
Nick, looking forward to your analysis tonight. Are you responsible as political editor for the political output on the BBC?
It's a shame that other BBC reporters aren't as balanced as you are. Kim Ghattas on News24 this morning seems to betray a bias.
Kim Ghattas, Washington Correspondent
11.16am News24
"He [John McCain] still believes that the race is tighter then it actually really is."
"It is about the possibilities that it has opened up, not so much necesscarily about who is going to win, though of course everybody is looking forward to the first [oops Kim betrays her bias and corrects herself] or a lot of people are looking forward to the first African-Amercian president."
Complain about this comment
Obviously both Cameron and Brown will try to spin a (probable) Obama victory in their favour, that is natural behaviour from the two... Yet what happens if Obama wins? Is now the best time for a man to change the world?
Don't get me wrong, the ideology that Obama preaches, to 'change' the world, reform America and the world's view of the US is certainly noble- (echoes of JFK in 1960 and the New Society?) yet is America in the shape were suitable progress can be made on what Obama's rhetoric promises to deliver?
With America's economy in a massive hole and the situation in Afghanistan deteriorating, with relations with Russia sinking and the seemingly ever present instability in the Middle East as a whole- is the year 2009 really the best opportunity for an inexperienced individual to change America and the world? Is it even possible?
I do hope it does, yet the lingering doubt is that ultimately, much like Kennedy's New Frontier (carried on by LBJ after his death under the guise of the Great Society programme and destroyed by the War in Vietnam) Obama's rhetorical promises could well be doomed to failure.
Perhaps it would be best for Obama not to win this election, to come back in 2012 or 2016, when he is more experienced, when the situation could be more conducive for change to occur, then we would trully, given the proper circumstances whether Obama can 'change' the World.
McCain has shown, despite the Shadow of Bush towering over him that he can still operate, he is a fighter, experienced and let's be honest, neither Obama nor Mcain have a clue about the economy- leave that job simply to the economic advisors who have the proper knowledge about the situation. (McCain was just foolhardy enough to admit it! Obama is trying to raise Capital Gains Tax in a time of recession and increase taxes on certain sections of society- not especially bright!)
So I almost believe, despite the heart saying Obama, that the rhetoric is merely too empty and that in the end, the head says McCain because of the circumstances. Obviously this will probably be lost on the hysteria that is the Obama support machine in America!
It will be important because if it turns out that Obama does fail on his promises, Cameron will inevitably be accussed of doing the same thing and a big difference is that Brown is far more clued up on the economy in comparison to McCain (using the Cameron is similar to Obama comparison) so it could be Cameron negative if Obama is too inexperienced.
Just my thoughts
Complain about this comment
PS. Not that that won't stop many people voting for 'Dave' and his motley crew when the time comes.
If you want to live in a truly democratic society, then first you must be free inside your head.
A surprising number of English people still behave like ... well ... employees.
Think about it.
Complain about this comment
In fact Obama and McCain are both novices, as neither have held a government post. McCain's army record doesn't really equip him for government, as it was all so long ago. The fact that 62% of Americans say they are happy with Obama says a great deal about his personality and charisma. He has star quality, like JFK, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair; they draw people in because the electorate want to believe in the change they offer. Obama has everything he needs to become a great president, even though, if he wins, he comes in at a turgid time for America. Not all Americans are convinced about 'big government' but, for the time being, that is what they will get. I wish whoever wins well. As for David Cameron, he doesn't have any of Obama's gifts. He flip-flops betweeen policies and hitches a ride on every passing bandwagon. I think he blew it when he came out strongly for McCain and the Republicans at the Tory conference. True to form, he has flip-flopped again. Now he identifies with the Democrats. Perhaps he thinks some of Obama's stardust will fall on him - no chance.
Complain about this comment
My original position was pro-Clinton. I had my reservations about Obama and still have them. Out of Obama and McCain, I'd tipped McCain to win but the financial crisis and his own poor campaigning got in the way of that, and the Republicans threw their edge away. It's not a strict like for like comparison but the picture in Britain is pretty similar.
A cursory scan of the media suggests that people in the Middle-east are viewing Gordon Brown as the man to lead us out of crisis, and Obama has hijacked a similar plan. I maintain this recession is just a blip and opportunities for industry and cooperation are plentiful enough to get things back on track sooner rather than later.
The early part of the year had a media focus on personality. Now, it's moving on and looking at the bigger picture and context. There's a bunch of comment in the media on social mobility, educational environment, Keynesian economics, and calming down, obsession, and immaturity that are worth reading. It can speak to where we've been, who we are, and where we're going.
Watch your thoughts, for they become words.
Watch your words, for they become actions.
Watch your actions, for they become habits.
Watch your habits, for they become character.
Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Complain about this comment
#2,
Never mind what Obama/McCain think about it (shaking hands with Al Qaeda); I thought it was extremely distasteful - especially as a few hours later he was shaking hands with British Military serving in Iraq.
Complain about this comment
Ah, a fine smokescreen to put up when the RBS is having a hard time, and Scots might be warmed up about it.
However, I noticed something more insidious.
Unions are attempting to kick out members of the BNP with no compensation and no redress. Now I have no sympathy for the BNP itself, and none for the unions in general terms. However for some jobs union membership is a pre-requisite for having the job, and it seems to me, on the surface at least, spiteful, mean spirited and, possibly a denial of human rights. At the very least it runs against any freedom of speech rules that we live by in this country.
I hope this idea gest squashed immediately with no further discussion, but I'm distrubed that it has even been raised.
Complain about this comment
Yes the next bout of schmoozing will make the Lewis Hamilton tributes look like small beer.
Complain about this comment
Well Nick what do you expect them to do? I don't think many of our political elite'll worry too much about which man they supported in the run-up to the US election. All that matters to them is buddying-up to their new master.
Complain about this comment
AMERICA – is a vast continent separated by an ocean which some of us refer to as "a pond". We are a group of small islands much closer to Europe than the Americas, both in culture and in size.
The only thing we share with America is a partial language. I say partial, because, for some of us, certain American dialects and expressions are incomprehensible.
We only have to nip across the channel, Irish Sea or North Sea to find people are pretty much the same as us, with the same aspirations, aims and many of them with the same language, at least as a second language, if not a first.
Can the same be said of America? Apparently, according to a recent poll, 47% per cent of British don't care who becomes the next American President and are not even aware of the candidates' names.
The world may well have a different and, dare we hope, better perspective if Obama becomes the next American President. But I fail to see how the result could affect the next British general election in any way. I am not likely to forget the congressman's comment about America in "danger of going down the slippery slope towards socialism".
I have always thought socialism, the welfare state and full employment to have been the great building blocks of creating a confident post-war Britain.
Has not American-style free-enterprise and capitalism has caused the current world financial problems? Would the great American continent be a greater place if the "slippery slope" were indeed embarked on?
Complain about this comment
Er, let's have a think about it..
Obama stands for 'change'
Gordon Brown stands for more of the same.
Doh!
Complain about this comment
"Waiting with interest"
Great title - wrong subject.
We're all waiting with interest to see if "Duff" Gordon can save his skin in Glenrothes while the BBC is following NuLab's agenda of setting the by-election this week to try to minimise the effect of bad news.
Who wins in the US will have to be worked with by NuLab and will change nothing in the UK.
Who wins in Glenrothes may have a profound impact on the timing of the general election and the UK constitution or even its existence afterwards.
Complain about this comment
Hey Nick, what's going on? Is the BBC latching on to the fact that the government isn't as good as it leads us to believe? Is the BBC starting to exert some indepenedent thought?
I refer to something called pledgewatch, which is to be applauded.
It's reviewing what has happened to some pledges given by the government in the past, frequently by El Gordo, and noting the outcome.
I suspect that posters on this blog could come up with a list of "pledges" to investigate, and this will form an interesting list before Allie and Petie spot what's going on, and crush this initiative.
Complain about this comment
JohnConstable wrote:
However, I suspect most English voters will see 'Dave' for what he really represents ... a continuation of hundreds of years of a born-to-rule elite.
So what are you suggesting? That just because Cameron happens to come from a certain background that we should vote for Brown?
Personally I don't mind what background the leader of the party I vote for comes from, I vote on policies and not on some stupid concept of class which means nothing to me on a personal day to day level.
If your only reason for not voting for Cameron is because you consider him "elite" then please don't vote in the next election.
Voting is very important (people have died for our right to vote) if you aren't willing to take it seriously then you disrespect their acts.
Ironically, I would consider someone who voted for the Loonys for the reason that they didn't really see anything of merit in the other parties to be a serious vote - as it shows that some thought as gone into the process.
Someone who blindly votes Labour because the Tories are toffs are just slaves to the process, they are little more then mindless drones and our political process would be better off without them.
People should vote on a parties policies and not the background of their leader.
In the last election I voted against Tony Blair (ok the last but one election - some how my name had been removed from the electoral roll for the last election) not because he went to private school but because I didn't agree with his policies.
I voted for the party that I thought would be best for the country (and also myself to be fair).
Complain about this comment
Nobody says it is easy being a politician.
Although part of the job seems to be pretending to know the answers to anything and everything, in reality, they must know their own limitations.
Crucially, they must privately recognise when they made bad mistakes and ensure that it does not happen again.
For example, Senator Obama was completely wrong when he refused to support the 'surge' in Iraq, although the American military knew that was what was required to turn the situation around.
So, hopefully a President Obama will NOT 'do a Rumsfeld' and impose his will over the experience of people in his adminstration who simply are better qualified .. be it in economic or military matters.
We have suffered similar here in England, our military forces have been humiliated in Iraq in recent times, mainly due to meddling by politicians.
Politicans really do need to know when to 'butt out'.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I'm supporting Obama.
I'll be very surprised if Obama doesn't get in. Both Labour and Conservatives will try and milk Obama for their own benefit.
Sometime today - could you please 'resist pressure' and report on the latest developments as Glenrothes? (Labour timed the Glenrothes by-election story to be 'buried' by the US election)
Complain about this comment
#21 herb
Spot on!
The past week or so's headlines have been taken up with the Ross/Brand story and coverage of the US elections. There has been very little reported about what's been going on in the UK and what the government is doing before the Glenrothes By-election.
If the government has used the past week to bury bad news, get digging Nick. We (and the people of Genrothes) need to know if anything untoward has happened before next Thursday!
Complain about this comment
These are two very perceptive comments.
As you suggest, being a mere 'novice' is just another label that 'Dave' will try to cosy up to. But, claims of a novice's potential and embracing the potential like a novice aren't the same thing. 'Dave' doesn't get this.
"Things are not what they appear to be: nor are they otherwise."
The British are especially bad at leadership and sociability, and by repeating the failed model of the past people can become the bosses and neighbours they hate. This is why feeling okay about yourself and being kind can help.
"Thousands of candles can be lit from a single candle,
and the life of the candle will not be shortened.
Happiness never decreases by being shared."
The Prime Minister was correct to acknowledge the achievements of the British military, and show compassion for people who were getting over taking a wrong turn in life. Perhaps, if you were more humble and generous you'd see this and be less miserable.
"If I do not actually exchange my happiness
For the sufferings of others,
I shall not attain the state of Buddhahood
And even in cyclic existence I shall have no joy."
-- Shantideva
Complain about this comment
Cue over the top media frenzy to the detriment of ALL other news over the next few days...
Complain about this comment
Cameron is more likely to be elected (or not) on what he does at home rather than whether a "novice" inherited the White House.
Obama is a Democrat, and while I think he will win, Cameron sided with the Republicans at conferences and is now ingratiating himself with the Democrats. He is going to need a lot more backbone if he ever gets into office in the UK. I doubt he will, if only because he is doing nothing but this preening and prancing and has nothing of his own to put up at a general election.
I am no fan of Brown but sympathise with his issue about DC as a novice. I also think that if Obama turns out to be a slightly younger Jimmy Carter, as some people suppose, Dave will be tarnished rather than gilded by association. And likewise Brown still has more of an idea - unfortunately - what he wants to do with a next term than does Dave, who backtracks every time he thinks he might have a sensible policy and changes his mind as much as he changes his socks.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
others have now picked up on the issue of race insomuch that I regard Obama, not as being black but of being mixed race. If he has been successful then which part of him will be claimed, will the whites say that actually he is half white as against being black.
There is also the issue that if I was American, and white then I too would vote for Obama. Why? Because if he is seen to have been elected primarily by the black community then he will be seen to represent balck America rather than America. That is why I made reference to the age old problem of the carptebaggers in the South after the Civil War.
If Obama brings about change, then we seriously have to ask what that change will be. Will the voters want instant cahnge, or will the voters now be told that the situation is worse than we thought so, we will have to attack pakistan, we will not be able to withdraw from Iraq, and the war against Afghanitan is going to bankrupt the country.
Obama does lack experience and it will be interesting to say the least when we see his cabinet, who will be in the White House with him. It will be payback time, only who will want to be on payroll, all the ones who contributed to his funding, this is going to be so cool.
Complain about this comment
The claim that Obama is a socialist bordering on a communists is Republican scare-mongery at its worst. A dose of some left wing thinking in American politics will do them good.
For the Obama philosophy to work though he will need to select and give responsibility to politically like minded individuals in his cabinet and ensure that the lobbyist in Washington,who have ruled the roost for far too long, no longer control the American agenda
If he can do these things , my feeling is that he will make a really good and sincere president who will be able to work along side whoever runs the UK in a few years time.
Complain about this comment
Some people were too locked into protest that it became protest for the sake of protest. They couldn't see that the game had changed but stuck with their old position out of habit. This is the tail wagging the dog.
I note that Obama's personality type is similar to George W. Bush, so don't buy him as a great visionary or intellectual, but he has bought into the "Brown Plan". That should make for a cosy arrangement. This is, also, the tail wagging the dog.
Who said the universe doesn't have a sense of humour?
Complain about this comment
I'm waiting with interest to see the results tonight/tomorrow. Both will bring a change to our lives, though the way NuLab have behaved with McCain I really am hoping Obama wins for all our sakes.
I'm also waiting with interest to see if Gordon gets the Saudis to bail out the IMF. How much has he sold out? Can you imagine the mess the IMF would have been in had it sold its gold when Gordon advised it to? I'm waiting with interest to see how embarrassed Gordon is for staying in a £9000 a night suite. Surely this goes against every moral compass he possesses.
Blair Force One will be ordered next!
Finally I'm also waiting with interest to see what happens in Glenrothes, and to see if this will herald an election here - either way it should do.
Complain about this comment
John Constable- It was Gordon Brown who dubbed Cameron a novice , conveneinetly ignoring the fact that Blair was also a novice when he won power.
Blair comes from the same background as Cameron , should the English not have voted for him ?
Should only worthy proles be considered as Prime Minister ?
Complain about this comment
"...you'll note that I'm staying cautious about proclaiming the result before it's actually known."
Very wise. Opinion polls are one thing, but rigged voting machines are quite another.
Complain about this comment
"My original position was pro-Clinton. I had my reservations about Obama and still have them. Out of Obama and McCain, I'd tipped McCain to win but the financial crisis and his own poor campaigning got in the way of that, and the Republicans threw their edge away."
So,Chuckie....you were pro Clinton,but tipped McCain to win...smells of hedging ones bets,doesn't it? What will you come up with after the result is declared,I wonder? I am waiting,along with many others here, for you to claim the gift of prophesy.
"The British are especially bad at leadership and sociability, and by repeating the failed model of the past people can become the bosses and neighbours they hate."
So where did you get this little gem from?...
Chuckies little Red Book of nonsensical sayings?
Complain about this comment
~18 newtactic sounds like one of those typical American haters whose opinion is visceral. Justin Webb in his new book "Have a Nice Day" opines that "along the way...American industry and inventiveness created much of the prosperity of the rest of the world through an adherence to free trade, to the commercial imperative and a willingness to shed blood and invest resources in keeping the planet's trading arteries unclogged". Credit where it is due; Europe and much of Asia are free and prosperous because of the unstinting spillage and expenditure of American blood and treasure. The great socialistic experiments of the 20th century were bloody and terrifying disasters, fatally so many millions of their people. I don't see too many people trying to get into Russia, the Middle East and China on dangerous, improvised craft.
Meanwhile, I've just spoken to a friend and colleague in Manhattan. He says the queue for the polling station in his district at 6.30 a.m. stretched for 4 blocks and was estimated to take 2 hours to clear. This bodes well for Obama who is more likely to benefit from a high turnout. It is a wonderful example of democracy in action.Let's hope that we turn out in droves when the pusillanimous Gordon Brown finally presents himself to the country. Oh, and finally, to define US politics in European left and right terms is absurd and reflects a deep and most likely deliberately misunderstanding of US politics.
Complain about this comment
I'm going to risk the lot here. I'm going to say that Obama will win this election by a landslide - the margin is going to bigger than most people think.
John McCain is going to struggle to get 160 EC votes. If he gets more than 200, I will not only eat my hat I will never post on this forum again.
Can't say fairer than that, can I?
Complain about this comment
Where is the confident post war Britain that socialism has built?
It wasn't American - style free enterprise that caused the financial crisis , it was left wing social democratic meddling in the markets that brought it about.
Complain about this comment
JohnConstable #8:
"However, I suspect most English voters will see 'Dave' for what he really represents ... a continuation of hundreds of years of a born-to-rule elite."
Which has the considerable advantage that he has had a good, old fashioned education. Having endured a deputy PM who was barely comprehensible, and a string of back benchers who are little better, I for one am tired of the experiment in reverse snobbery. I also despise the sight of social climbers using their political positions to fawn over dubious foreign oligarchs. Frankly, "Old Money" doesn't have to do that!
Complain about this comment
BANG .....
Oooops
Welcome President Biden.
Complain about this comment
Charles
Your comments regarding us Brits are never very positive. I do wonder why you live here.
If I lived in the US and was as outspoken about the americans as you are about us, I very much doubt they'd be as humble and generous as we are.
As for our attitudes to those who have taken a wrong turn in life, I think we are an extremely tolerant and generous race. Is there another country in the world to where one can just go, and get full support (and by that I mean housing, food, medical care, education, etc) from that country without having financially contributed to it, or being able to financially support oneself upon entry.
Complain about this comment
swami @ 33
I know that Mr. Blair came from a similar educational background (Fettes) to Mr. Cameron.
And I was horrified that the people of Sedgefield chose him over an honest and honourable man - Reg Keys - at the last General Election.
So, yes, I think that we do need a few hundred years of the worthy 'proles' being in charge to redress the balance a bit.
Complain about this comment
saga #37
With you on this one myself. A lot has been said about the numbers of Americans who will say Obama but vote McCain. I wonder if the opposite might not actually be true.
We will soon find out.
Complain about this comment
MalcolmW2 @ 39
I would agree that reverse snobbery is as bad as the straightforward sort.
You mentioned a former deputy PM and for me, the sight of this person playing croquet on the lawn at Chequers seemed to represent some grotesque sort of ultimate as in "The working class can kiss my ar*se, I've got the foremans job at last".
That is, a complete betrayal of decent working people.
You can only conclude that it is the system itself that perverts these politicians, who often start out in politics with the noblest of ideals but all-too-soon sometimes let themselves become corrupted.
Complain about this comment
"Standby for Gordon Brown to cite an Obama victory (if it comes*) as evidence of a resurgence of the centre-left and a victory for belief in the role of the state, internationalism and global co-operation."
A victory for belief in the role of the state? That *would* be something for Brown to come out and say. Almost on par as the self-righteous, fraudulant trumpeting he did in Manchester in September.
#8
"However, I suspect most English voters will see 'Dave' for what he really represents ... a continuation of hundreds of years of a born-to-rule elite."
He needs to be careful who he affiliates himself with sure, because in two years time its bound to bite him in the butt.
Anyway our current Prime Minister got it into his head that the premiership was nothing more than his rightful inheritance after he bullied out Blair. So please tell me who has more disdain for democracy?
Complain about this comment
Talking of interest, I couldn't resist mentioning this gem, taken directly from the bbc:
When Gordon Brown was asked what he thought of the issue, he replied: "We have had two interest rate cuts in the last period of time, and some of that has been passed on. Let us see what the Bank of England does this Thursday."
If anyone thinks that america is listening to what Brown has to say, they're living on a different planet. "last period of time", "some", "let's just seem what happens". How vague, indecisive, and totally out of control does he think that sounds?
I wish I was an american at the moment, at least both of their potential leaders understand they've got economic problems; our leader is still in total denial and has got no idea what he's going.
Complain about this comment
One only has to hope the PM's congrats for the new US president is less cringe-making than his over-spun and posed congrats for Lewis Hamilton, sitting bolt upright, sweetly smiling with hands at prayer along side the union flag. Pass me the sick bag, Mandy.
Complain about this comment
#36 "American industry and inventiveness created much of the prosperity of the rest of the world through an adherence to free trade, to the commercial imperative and a willingness to shed blood and invest resources in keeping the planet's trading arteries unclogged"
To be fair, the United States has only been around for just over 200 years. The British Empire should be given the (perhaps dubious) credit of using military might to spread free-trade around the globe for the past 500 years. In particular, the Royal Navy and commercial entities like the British East India Company were instrumental in pacifying entire continents ready for commercial exploitation.
Complain about this comment
# 23 JohnConstable
Why don't you get out of your Little Englander personna and start thinking about the rest of the peoples who make up the this Unitied Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland who have soldiers serving and dying in the trouble spots around the globe and are suffering the same indignities as you espouse.
Whilst I agree with your sentements about politicans, if they had to fight in the police actions I don't think they would venture far from the Palace of Westminister
Complain about this comment
mark @ 22
Someone who blindly votes Labour because the Tories are toffs are just slaves to the process, they are little more then mindless drones and our political process would be better off without them.
I feel you're being a little harsh on us lefties, Mark. If the leadership of a party is drawn principally from a narrow and privileged elite, why on earth do you think that that is not a valid concern?
Complain about this comment
swan @ 38
it was left wing social democratic meddling in the markets that brought it about.
That's the crazy, left wing bonus culture you'll be meaning there, am I right? ...
Complain about this comment
Glenholme @ 49
I readily update that comment @ 23 to :
"We have suffered similar here in the Untied Kingdom, our military forces have been humiliated in Iraq in recent times, mainly due to meddling by politicians".
The 'Little England' epithet is often cast about.
But we never hear anybody say 'Little Scotland' or 'Little Wales', do we?
And we should not.
Why belittle individual countries or those who support those countries and their peoples?
Complain about this comment
Glenholme @ 49
I readily update that comment @ 23 to :
"We have suffered similar here in the United Kingdom, our military forces have been humiliated in Iraq in recent times, mainly due to meddling by politicians".
The 'Little England' epithet is often cast about.
But we never hear anybody say 'Little Scotland' or 'Little Wales', do we?
And we should not.
Why belittle individual countries or those who support those countries and their peoples?
Complain about this comment
14. , Kathmanduwallah
#2,
Never mind what Obama/McCain think about it (shaking hands with Al Qaeda); I thought it was extremely distasteful - especially as a few hours later he was shaking hands with British Military serving in Iraq.
Thank you, Kathmanduwallah,
You give me back some faith in humanity. My scorn for Brown goes beyond politics. There is an old-fashioned word for him, cad.
Complain about this comment
Sagamix - in answer to your question - because background is unimportant - policies and competence are what 's important.
I would have thought that you lefties would be the first to believe such a thing , has it not been your mantra since time immemorial ?
You seem to be blinded by class envy that has dogged this country for decades.
Complain about this comment
You're misunderstanding what's being said and listening to rumour. I never said there weren't any pluses, nor have I ever said I'm American. So, you might want to back down and let that one go.
Complain about this comment
50 Sagamix
You need to get out more
Complain about this comment
I believe, and hope, that Obama will win, for the simple reason that he more closely represents Lincoln's view of government "of the people, by the people, for the people" than any prospective presidential candidate since Independence. People simply believe that he is in it for them, and not himself or the backers that put him in the Whitehouse.
UK politics has lacked a party, or a party leader, that has inspired anything like the same belief that Obama has. Bliar thought he was the Messiah and had he not lied his way into Iraq, he might have pulled it off, but the truth is, Michael Foot would have beaten the Tories in 1997.
If either Brown or Cameron want to take anything from the US election, other than some lessons in how to spend a couple of billion dollars campaigning, they should be looking at who is voting, and not who they are voting for. This election is a triumph for democracy because Obama in particular has encouraged the disenfranchised to take back their ownership of the political process.
President Obama will have plenty to keep him busy without entertaining hasbeens and wannabes from UK politics. I'd be a lot happier if our political class spent the next few months running up to our election next May, emphasising that the most important thing you can do in a democracy is to participate, and not trying to score political points and basking in reflected glory from the other side of the Atlantic.
Complain about this comment
jc @ 57
you need to get out more
why's that then?
Complain about this comment
Sagamix - No sir !left wing meddling - The whole sub prime fiasco was caused by the Clinton administration meddling in the American mortgage market compelling mortgage lenders to extend credit in the shape of sub prime mortgages to the poor despite the fact that there was a very good chance they would default.
But let's ignore that fact and hang a banker , they deserve it , after all they probabaly belong to the same priviledged elite as David Cameron.
Vive le revolution !
Complain about this comment
#56 CEH
OK Charles - you're not american - and I'm a millionaire.
Complain about this comment
swan @ 55
You seem to be blinded by class envy
No way.
I'm surprised, and a little disappointed, by people who have no worries about the leadership of a major political party being drawn from a narrow and unrepresentative base. Seems a bit complacent to say the least.
I'd make exactly the same point if, say, half the Labour front bench had gone to Holland Park Comprehensive.
Why is it not a valid concern?
Complain about this comment
JC #44
"That is, a complete betrayal of decent working people"
That is just a silly thing to say which reveals the chip on your shoulder.
Croquet is an excellent game; allowing your devious frustrations to be excised on the sporting field.
It is the "desire" to keep the class war going that.....keeps the class war going.
Complain about this comment
59 Sagamix
You are normally relatively balanced individual. Throwing toff jibes around the place is a little silly.
Plus it tends to backfire politically
See?
Complain about this comment
Both Brown and Cameron will be waiting to see how the nexr president tackles America's problems.
After all the same problems are about to hit here if not here already. We're about six months behind them.
There are so many who have such high expectations of Obama. They have put him on a pedastal.
What happens after the elections if he cannot live up to these will be of more interest.
He will certainly have his work cut out on social and domestic problems in the years ahead
Not the best time to take over but it could be interesting.
Complain about this comment
swan @ 60
The whole sub prime fiasco was caused by the Clinton administration meddling in the American mortgage market compelling mortgage lenders to extend credit in the shape of sub prime mortgages to the poor despite the fact that there was a very good chance they would default.
Nope.
Nothing wrong with the principle of extending home ownership.
Problem caused by rabid hard selling of inappropriate home loans (with not a little fraud involved too) and smoke and mirrors structuring of said loans into tradeable securities. Oh and some help from conflicted (of interest) Ratings Agencies.
Yeah, that's about it.
You blame Bill Clinton, if you like, but that's just right wing political prejudice talking, I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
Regardless of who wins in the USA elections, either candidate is infinitely better than Bush who is the worst president in US history. And whoever wins, the governments of the EU will simply have to "do business" with him!
Complain about this comment
Sagamix - It is not a valid concern because a person's competence or ability to govern in not defined by where they went to school .
Is that not a belief that you lefties hold dear ?
Complain about this comment
In some ways being an American must be just a little less comfortable then it used to be before.
Next January they are getting a new guy to be their front man. Yet the same old problems remain. They are bankrupt, both financially and philosophically.
Yet again they have tried to bring democracy through the barrel of a gun and yet again they have failed. Yet somehow they forget and forget very quickly. They forget the fundamental rule that is, in the end, you have to make peace with your enemies.
Is this their last catastrophic military error? No, not quite yet, but it looks like the point is getter nearer when the USA can no longer afford to have such a large military expenditure. That is, the end of the super power has been brought about by Wall Street. It looks likely that they will be forced through budget cuts to rein in their more insane military adventures.
They will admit that they are no longer a 'super-power' with a World wide reach and this realisation will be good for Americans and the rest of the World.
Perhaps they will also start to buy and drive smaller cars too (however not before the major parts of the rust-belt have gone bust!)
Let us hope they find some way to have an all inclusive health service of a reasonable standard that is free at the time of need, if they do not, then they are putting themselves outside the Developed World and firmly into the Third World (and perhaps that is where they belong.) How are the mighty fallen!
Two cheers for ObamaCain! (No cheers for GWB.)
Complain about this comment
this just in: uk government tells pet owners they should let their pets go to the toilet, and should provide "entertainment" and "mental stimulation"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7708411.stm
Is this really what our government is supposed to be for? Telling us how to look after a cat?
Oh, how lucky those americans are that they can just tell their government to get lost and mind their own business.
Complain about this comment
jc @ 64
Throwing toff jibes around the place is a little silly.
Well excuse me! So, a concern that the leadership of a major political party is drawn from a narrow and unrepresentative base is silly is it?
I say to NOT be concerned is complacent - sorry.
If it's the photo that's annoying you (maybe because you're in it or something) you can just look the other way, no?
Listen, I honestly think this is a serious issue for the BTP. Bringing it up is doing them a favour, actually.
Complain about this comment
66 Sagamix
Here is a little on Gordon Brown's contribution to the economic crash:
How Brown crashed the economy
Brown's ruinous contribution
Complain about this comment
re: 71 sagamix
Gordon Brown came from a "representative base" I guess, but he didn't realise that doubling the lowest tax rate would adversely effect people on low pay.
Where you come from is irrelevant; despite what labour/bbc tell you, rich people do sometimes have the capacity to understand things outside their own personal life experience; that capacity is sadly lacking in labour, but it's one which all politicians of all parties should have; if they don't have it then they don't deserve to be elected regardless of party.
I'm assuming you'd like to have positive discrimination (or, more simply, discrimination) in place; I think that approach is poisonous to democracy and fairness and goes against everything that a fair society should be striving for.
Equality of opportunity is the key, as the yanks say, not forced equality of income/jobs through unfair redistribution and discrimination.
Complain about this comment
37 Saga
For my part right or wrong I don't want you to go, you make me smile too much.
However, I don't trust the exit polls, there's a syndrome (Know doubt you'll know what it's called). When being Canvassed, you'll get a every day Joe, saying "Absoultely Obama is my man). Reach the booth where no one can see and put a cross in the McCain Box.
I'm still unsure about the Yanks, have been there and worked with them abroad (A very small percentage). They are so insular and probably only slightly less paranoid than the Chinese.
Are they mature enough as a collective nation to embrace a black President. Over here I believe anyone of any race, colour, religion or gender could be PM (scrapping a bit at the moment admittedly). But america for every Lincoln you have 100 Cleatus'
We'll see I guess. Anyway if old McCain gets in stick around.
Y'all be careful now.
Complain about this comment
71 Sagamix
Who cares where these people come from if they are the best people for the job?
If the country was being run well - people wouldn't give a stuff where they come from.
Complain about this comment
#70 getridofgordonnow
this just in: uk government tells pet owners they should let their pets go to the toilet, and should provide "entertainment" and "mental stimulation"
Give me strength! Another half-baked attempt at diverting our attention away from the more pressing things. Hilary Benn obviously hasn't got enough real work to keep him busy.
Complain about this comment
Kathmanduwallah @ 63
I have plenty of chips, thank you but they are not on my shoulders.
Prescott was supposed to be working for us when he was playing croquet but I suppose we have to be grateful that he was'nt sliding a hand up womens skirts (something blokes routinely did in the 1950's) or worse.
To me, that type of thing grated very much when I thought of really decent Union blokes I'd met who'd fought very hard for their people.
I am pleased to see that social mobility is 'improving', if that is indeed the case given that the politicians have severely impeded it for decades via their education system 'experiments'.
I am the last person who wants to see a class or any other sort of war perpetuated.
Complain about this comment
There is plenty wrong with extending home ownership if it is extended to those who cannot afford it and whose defaults threaten to bring down the entire financial system !
The rabid hard selling of mortagages packaged as securities .
Hmmm ? whose policy was that ? er the Clinton administration . The first bank to be co erced into this plan , er Bear Sterns , the first bank in America requiring rescuing .
But let not facts interrupt the feeding frenzy on capitalism ,
Complain about this comment
swan @ 68
It is not a valid concern because a person's competence or ability to govern in not defined by where they went to school .
Is that not a belief that you lefties hold dear?
Yes, for sure.
But you're missing the point - which is that it's a valid concern if too many of the people running the show went to the same school.
Doesn't matter who those people are or what that school is.
Hey, I'm just saying it's a valid concern, that's all - surprised it's touched such a nerve - wasn't particularly trying to.
So, now we've got things a bit clearer ... it's a valid concern, yes?
Complain about this comment
Sagamix
The problem is that "the leadership of a major political party is drawn from a narrow and unrepresentative base" can be applied pretty much across the board. It is built right in to party politics.
The whole point of it was that (Old) Labour and (Old) Tory each represented differing, narrow, groups, and it was down to which party persuaded the vast swathe of people in between that they would be better off with them.
The bigger problem now is that you could quite easily say the the leadership of the two main parties is drawn from the same narrow and unrepresentative base, so where does that leave you?
You have to judge by more than the cover. Two different people can go through exactly the same experience and will come out of it in completely different ways.
Complain about this comment
sagamix.
I doubt you'll find many MPs who can properly represent any of us once they get on the gravy train, stop paying their Sky bill and get their mitts on the John Lewis catalogue, so don't sweat the background so much.
Complain about this comment
Sagamix - No it is not a valid concern, for the reasons i gave some moments ago !!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
#72 jonathan_cook
Pretty damning articles - and you can always rely on the Times to get it's facts right. I'm sure there are many people out there who think that Gordon is the saviour of the world. Unfortunately, none of them read The Times.
Complain about this comment
#81 magic_2010
I doubt you'll find many MPs who can properly represent any of us once they get on the gravy train, stop paying their Sky bill and get their mitts on the John Lewis catalogue, so don't sweat the background so much.
sagamix.....
The free Sky, John Lewis catalogue, paid mortgages and the vast expenses account is a huge draw for those wanting a better life at the expense of the british taxpayer. I haven't heard of any MP who has said they would give all the perks up because they really wanted to do the job....have you?
Complain about this comment
Saga #79
notwithstanding the very hard work and sacrifices some parents undertake to give their children the best education (over those with flipping great wadges of cash) - surely it is a good thing to have our leaders educated at the highest possible standards, if possible.
Eton, Oundle, Fettes and other private schools have, for obvious reasons, most of the very best teachers. So again, notwithstanding the "priviledged" argument - it should be reasonable to expect a better than average end product.
Now I know that holds hugely difficult connotations, politically, but it's probably true. Does this make it a ruling elite? Not really, but at least they will know how to tie a half-windsor properly, and never EVER wear brown shoes in town or after 7 O'Clock pm.
Complain about this comment
swan @ 82
No it is not a valid concern, for the reasons i gave some moments ago
So you'd be relaxed if the whole of the UK Cabinet went to Fettes, would you?
magic @ 81
don't sweat the background so much.
I'm not sweating it (well I am now, because of you lot!) ... I'm just pointing up an issue for Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.
grawth @ 80
You have to judge by more than the cover. Two different people can go through exactly the same experience and will come out of it in completely different ways.
Of course that is true. But let me draw something to your attention ... only 7 pc of people in this country go to private schools, whereas 60 pc of Conservative MPs did. Now that's not reason in itself not to vote for them (their policies and track record are more important and supply sufficient reason in themselves) but it is a concern, no?
gordon @ 73
Where you come from is irrelevant
It should be but I'm sorry to say that it isn't - that's pretty much my point, in matter of fact ...
Complain about this comment
I've gave two links to articles published in The Times in my first post. Both were generally favourable to Labour. One was from the Guardian, and the other three were from the Independent.
Just the facts.
Complain about this comment
kath @ 85
at least they will know how to tie a half-windsor properly, and never EVER wear brown shoes in town or after 7 O'Clock pm.
Okay, that's a fair (and powerful) point - although (IMO) it's not Gordon's lack of a half windsor that drags him down, tiewise, it's his lack of any colour bar purple! Not doing him any favours, that, as he attempts to save us all from ruin ...
Complain about this comment
Sagamix - I don't care where the cabinet went to school!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I care about their policies ,their competence and their ability to run the country .
All sadly lacking in the current Cabinet .
Complain about this comment
#87 CEH
As I said, none of them read The Times.
Complain about this comment
shelling @ 83
you can always rely on the Times to get its facts right.
Think a translation is needed here, shelling ... you know, for those who don't yet speak the lingo.
So,
"get its facts right" = "write leaders sympathetic to the tory party"
S'okay, don't feel guilty ... I don't mind doing it!
Complain about this comment
Saga #88
Quite!
And we must always ensure that our Foreign Secretary is not ugly - he must have a discernable gravitas as our "front-of-house"
Complain about this comment
swan @ 89
I don't care where the cabinet went to school !!!
No, neither do I !!!!! ... but I'd be a bit concerned if they'd all been to the same school ... you've seen the motion picture "Deliverance" I bet, haven't you?
Well then.
Complain about this comment
Re - reverse snobbery:
If you want to see a good example of 'inverted snobbery' check out John Prescott's programme on Class. Even the kids from less well off backgrounds are not as hung up on the concept as he appears to be. Good old fashioned hard work, motivation and a confidence to succeed count for a lot as the entrepreneurs who started with nothing are testament to.
Complain about this comment
#91 sagamix
...I don't feel guilty at all.
Complain about this comment
dON'T remember any ex Etonians in Deliverance !
Complain about this comment
86 Sagamix
7% of the country has been to private school - so?
Labour ministers are far more likely to have had a private education than Labour backbenchers (25 per cent as opposed to 16 per cent). Also the total number of privately educated Labour MP's is on the rise as a general trend.
I haven't been to private school. As far as I am concerned so long as the best people, with the best skills are leading the country I don't care.
However - maybe you've got a point:
......Maybe we should purge the current Cabinet? Afterall there are too many Miliband's in it - until recently there was even an ex-girlfriend of the banana toting Miliband in Cabinet as well! Never mind politicians all coming from one school - this lot are all from one clan...!!!!! Shock. Horror. ;-)
Complain about this comment
2. At 11:03am on 04 Nov 2008, phoenixarisenq wrote:
I don'tknow what Gordon Brown is up to, so can hardly say what his behaviour will do to take friends in Washington. His journey to Saudi Arabia to find money to prop up British banks, involved shaking hands with Al Quieda 'sympathisers' who were locked up for six years.
I wonder what Obama and McCann think of this behaviour?
This is the easiest question of the day...
..... they will think what their advisers tell them to think, which has been the same since 1990 ...
..... only the British prime minister, he'll do what you tell him to!
Complain about this comment
#94 sicilian
I saw a bit of John Prescott's programme. I tuned in just as he was asking two girls which class they thought they came from.
Both said middle class. Prescott said he thought they would have said working class to which one girl replied "Oh, I don't work". Priceless!
Complain about this comment
15:
Unions are attempting to kick out members of the BNP with no compensation and no redress. Now I have no sympathy for the BNP itself, and none for the unions in general terms. However for some jobs union membership is a pre-requisite for having the job, and it seems to me, on the surface at least, spiteful, mean spirited and, possibly a denial of human rights. At the very least it runs against any freedom of speech rules that we live by in this country.
.................
The trades union movement has a responsibilty to represent all its members, black, white, gay, straight, muslim or atheist. They have every right to deny membership to those whose party wish to deny civil rights to all but 2 of those groups.
The BNP have their own trade union called (laughably) Solidarity, let them stick to that.
Complain about this comment
Most I speak to are disinterested in America or its politics. Ironically they seem more interested in ours!
O'Bama - is he an Irish American?
McCain has been a very brave man I think and would get my vote, no question.
Complain about this comment
sagamix wrote:
mark @ 22
Someone who blindly votes Labour because the Tories are toffs are just slaves to the process, they are little more then mindless drones and our political process would be better off without them.
I feel you're being a little harsh on us lefties, Mark. If the leadership of a party is drawn principally from a narrow and privileged elite, why on earth do you think that that is not a valid concern?
I am not attacking lefties here, I am attacking people who judge only on apperances. Most lefties would not vote for Cameron because his policies were too right wing.
IMO someone who wouldn't vote for Cameron solely because of his background is not a lefty. A lefty is someone who has "political views" - not voting for someone because of background is a lack of a viewpoint.
Complain about this comment
jon @ 97
As far as I am concerned so long as the best people, with the best skills are leading the country I don't care.
Yep, that's what we all want - the best people leading the country.
Which is why it's a concern if the pool from which those leaders are drawn is too narrow.
That's all I'm saying - I'm not on some class war trip.
Complain about this comment
If you want to see a good example of 'inverted snobbery' check out John Prescott's programme on Class. Even the kids from less well off backgrounds are not as hung up on the concept as he appears to be.
Oh, never fear. Several years at state school being indoctrinated by lefty 'intellectual' teachers and a regular diet of why their life is rubbish because, well, it's somebody else's fault and they'll grow up to have the same inverse snobbery as their Labour-voting parents and grandparents before them.
Those upper-class kids get all the breaks. Better schools, better extra-curricular activities, better houses, better jobs, better-looking wives. It's not my fault that I didn't encourage my kids to read and learn. It's not my fault that I couldn't be bothered/lacked the initiative to take them to the rugby club on Saturday mornings so they'd learn the value of team sports. It's not my fault I didn't take them to scouts or encourage them to join the ATC and develop some discipline/confidence to give instructions/ability to follow instructions.
No. It's all the fault of the rich upper-class elite, sending their kids to their elite schools. Excluding my kids from a rounded education because I've got no money.
The laughable thing is that if these whiny wastrel parents would spend a fraction of their time encouraging their kids then future 'elite' universities and 'elite' employers would value their kids far more than some spoon-fed kid from an 'elite' public school. But the vast majority don't. They just sit there whining about their poor opportunities in life and voting Labour.
The party of the 'working class'. It certainly suits the socialists to perpetuate the class war. It provides legions of voters generation after generation. Too bad it doesn't actually produce any smarter, more ambitious generations. Just despondent drones making the same self-harming choices as their parents and grandparents.
Complain about this comment
94. I have been to both independent boarding school (convent) AND state school. I have to say the latter was appalling with a proportion of rough children and teachers throwing chalk at them. The other children kept away from the rough children - natural instinct. The children from middle class homes worked hard, most going on to Grammar and passing common entrance.
It is the home that sets the scene. Absolutely no question.
Complain about this comment
swan @ 96
don't remember any ex Etonians in Deliverance
No, but they all ... oh never mind!
Complain about this comment
Prescott is such a hypocrite. His wife seems more honest. He spouts of about working class whilst playing croquet and furnishing his home like a quasi stately home.
Crazy mixed up kid - champagne socialist.
The first thing these "socialists" do when they get some money or status is to change into middle England conservatives.
Eerily, the first thing well heeled "socialists" who have been indoctrinated at university do (Harriet Harperson, Ed Balls et al) is to look flat faced, dress down, supress their cultured accents and teach themselves Estuary English. Disgraceful.
Complain about this comment
kath @ 92
we must always ensure that our Foreign Secretary is not ugly - he must have a discernable gravitas as our "front-of-house"
Well yes, but good looks can detract from gravitas can't they? ... I mean, who would you rather see as Foreign Secretary, William Hague or Ronan Keating?
(No, don't answer that!)
Complain about this comment
107 flamepatricia
I agree. The class system obviously did nothing to enhance Mr Prescott's standard of living, did it?!!
Complain about this comment
56. You have never said you are american, no but your spelling gives you away.
Complain about this comment
U @ 104
It's not my fault that I didn't encourage my kids to read and learn. It's not my fault that I couldn't be bothered/lacked the initiative to take them to the rugby club on Saturday mornings so they'd learn the value of team sports. It's not my fault I didn't take them to scouts or encourage them to join the ATC and develop some discipline/confidence to give instructions/ability to follow instructions
A hard headed little essay in favour of the scouts and personal responsibility - great to hear!
And what about people taking on loads too much debt? Why have you missed that out?
Oh sorry, I remember now - that's all the government's fault isn't it?
Course.
Complain about this comment
109. shellingout
No, it didn't. His wife I thought was more honest.
The thing is we are all free to chop and change, live the type of lives we want according to our talents and incomes.
Those who call David Cameron a "toff" are probably just jealous. Their parents couldn't send them to the top schools nor would they even think about it. Horses for courses.
Some of the worst as I have said are those born into privilege, Harperson and that ghastly BBC journalist woman whose father was a well known comedian pianist, but try and change down to attract the lower classes. Mad.
Complain about this comment
flame @ 101
O'Bama - is he an Irish American?
Yes, I heard that too - wouldn't surprise me one iota if he was.
Complain about this comment
#100 NottingHillHammer
You are missing the point by a mile. As I said I have no sympathy for extreme right or extreme left wing views. However, in a strong democracy, I believe anybody has the right to believe in what they want, provided they do not interfere with others.
From your perspective that only applies if their views coincide with yours, and opposing views need to be suppressed, regardless.
That way tyranny lies, and it must be opposed, regardless.
Complain about this comment
Class war is another of Labour's excuses for hanging onto the past... but nobody's fooled.
The voters saw through their dreadful 'Tory toff' campaign at Glasgow East (hilarious that it was really the Nu-Lab candidate that was in Burke's Peerage) and it won't save them now.
A fictional 'class war': what else would we expect from a party of power-hungry backward-looking liars and frauds?
Complain about this comment
98. At 5:03pm on 04 Nov 2008, Shambles Baby wrote:
2. At 11:03am on 04 Nov 2008, phoenixarisenq wrote:
I don't know what Gordon Brown is up to, so can hardly say what his behaviour will do to take friends in Washington. His journey to Saudi Arabia to find money to prop up British banks, involved shaking hands with Al Quieda 'sympathisers' who were locked up for six years.
I wonder what Obama and McCann think of this behaviour?
This is the easiest question of the day...
..... they will think what their advisers tell them to think, which has been the same since 1990 ...
..... only the British prime minister, he'll do what you tell him to!
Shambles Baby, what worries me is it is sad enough if a British prime minister takes orders from a foreign power, but if it is Saudi Arabia?? Guess all depends now on which country promises the most cash.
Complain about this comment
111 Sagamix
Well - in a way - it would be good if schools as well as families etc taught the value of good household budgeting, mortgages, debt credit card management, saving, shares, pensions etc.
I have had to find this all out by myself largely - I know I would have benefited from schools teaching this sort of thing - because my parents ain't no financial whizz kids.
As we discussed previously - this sums up where the government is to blame (in our current financial crash):
"The Government has repeatedly proclaimed an end to boom and bust, yet has produced both.
It has been found wanting in three essential respects: monetary policy, regulation, and fiscal policy. Low interest rates, owing principally to prolonged low inflation, were the foundation of the era of cheap money that created the asset price bubble.
That bubble, in everything from housing to equities and financial instruments, is now deflating. The overseers of the financial institutions believed essentially that they were best left to their own devices; they failed to stem the systemic risk that has become known as the credit crunch."
Complain about this comment
100 NottingHillHammer
You are missing the point by a mile. As I said I have no sympathy for extreme right or extreme left wing views. However, in a strong democracy, I believe anybody has the right to believe in what they want, provided they do not interfere with others.
From your perspective that only applies if their views coincide with yours, and opposing views need to be suppressed, regardless.
That way tyranny lies, and it must be opposed, regardless.
.........................
I know you do not support the BNP. I simply think you are wrong. No-one is denying BNP members their right to believe in and support the racist policies of their racist party, however just as the BNP deny membership of their racist party to non-whites, Trades Unions are entitled to deny membership to them.
Complain about this comment
#116 phoenixarisenq
Further to your comments, I'm interested in knowing where this leaves the old BAE slush fund inquiry.
We know the Saudis brought pressure to bear to suppress it, then that was ruled unlawful, and it is supposed to be under way.
I find it hard to imagine that this did not crop up in any negotiations withe them, specially if we are asking for more money.
After all, at the risk of getting moderated, how are they going to channel their cut from this transaction?
Complain about this comment
#118 NottingHillHammer
If you accept that, what happens if there remain any closed shops, where membership of a union is required. I don't know if any emain, but if they do it makes it very difficult to justify depriving somebody of their job because of their views, political or otherwise. Then, once you have an exception, you get chaos.
Probably underlyng all this is money, no matter what pretext is given to justify it. Membership still requires the old political levy, which is money to the Labour party. If you opt out, which is allowed, somebody will ask why, specially when pressuring you to give. So if the reason is that you support another political party, and it could be any, up goes the cry to expel them from the union.
I am not a union member, so I may be a bit outdated in my view of union leaders behaviour patterns, and will happily stand corrected if so.
Complain about this comment
119 herb_igone_ex_tuga
Hi there, old pal,
Like you I had my name removed and was given a number, until I got my old name back. The forum's equivalent to going to jail or an Asbo. This, because in my innocence I used a link which is on the forbidden list. I won't use links again, because it seems I naturally swin against the tide and am attracted to forbidden fruits.
I dare not ask your question as I will be muzzled once again, and probably be banned for life. At least I won't be whipped or beheaded - at least not yet.
Since I dare not respond to yoru question, just think of that which dares not say its name, teh most distasteful scenario possible, and that will be the answer.
Complain about this comment
mark @ 102!
A lefty is someone who has "political views" - not voting for someone because of background is a lack of a viewpoint.
Fair enough, Mark ... 'specially if you insert "purely" between "someone" and "because" ... which I'm sure you meant to.
Any case let's move on from this nonsense. I think we can do that now that you and I, as befitting a couple of mature adults, have reached a sensible and right minded consensus.
Complain about this comment
jonathan @ 117
Oh I don't believe it ... there's that blooming Times editorial again!
You can't keep doing that - it's as bad as somebody continually posting the famous George Osborne Bullingdon Club photo or something ...
Complain about this comment
I doubt you can find a single word I've typed in this blog that has an American spelling unless MS Word pulled a stunt, or I cut and pasted a quote from somewhere.
Just the facts.
Complain about this comment
104# U4333132 whatever.
Could your views be more obnoxious and insulting.
You condemn 10s of thousands of people virtually none of whom you know alleging stereotypical behaviour in the said people as you stereotype them to your hearts content.
Laughably you don't even see the irony. How sad (and frankly pathetic).
Complain about this comment
121
Please excuse typographical errors. Many of the letters seem to have vanished from my keyboard - to much bashing away in a fury!
Complain about this comment
72 JCook.
Thanks yet again for the link to the Times article.
Quote
"The framework for monetary policy is right in conception. Targeting inflation allows greater flexibility in responding to economic shocks than targeting the monetary aggregates or the exchange rate - successive approaches tried and found wanting under Conservative governments."
That was (just for effect)
"successive approaches tried and found wanting under Conservative governments"
Thanks JC
Complain about this comment
111 sagamix wrote:
"U @ 104
It's not my fault that I didn't encourage my kids to read and learn. It's not my fault that I couldn't be bothered/lacked the initiative to take them to the rugby club on Saturday mornings so they'd learn the value of team sports. It's not my fault I didn't take them to scouts or encourage them to join the ATC and develop some discipline/confidence to give instructions/ability to follow instructions
A hard headed little essay in favour of the scouts and personal responsibility - great to hear!
And what about people taking on loads too much debt? Why have you missed that out?
Oh sorry, I remember now - that's all the government's fault isn't it?"
Saga, you seem to forget that it is only recently that the government - yes the setter of permitted financial frameworks - have tolerated financial institutions doing stupid things.
Under previous Governments and the BoE, if they chose to, they could have made banks and building societies stick to sensible lending levels. They could have stopped credit-card companies simply jacking up borrowing limits, without regard to the borrower's ability to pay.
This regime has loosened controls as a matter of policy.
Money, whether credit-based or earnt, still slurps through the system, creating an illusion of "growth".
The housing bubble would simply not have achieved its highest level had money been more difficult to come by. Prices would still have risen, as demand exceeds supply. But the nonsensical levels just couldn't have happened without out the benign approval of the State.
And all this class stuff is nonsense.
Knowingly or unknowingly, we've all probably worked with people whose ancestors had some high office, but who either fell out of favour, lost all their money, or succumbed to affects of in-breeding... Maybe that happened recently, maybe long ago. So what?
It's become an irrelevance. I'm happy to acknowledge the Queen as head of State. (And still doubt whether directly elected heads of state are "better people". Check out GWB, Mitterand, Berlusconi, etc. And I bet most people would find it hard to recall who is the German Head of State...)
Just imagine. A while ago, had we a directly-elected Head, it could have been Kinnock. He of the "I'm the first member of my family to attend University for a thousand generations" garbage. I always wanted him to explain where the first university was established, 15,000 years ago. No marks on any map I've found so far...
Complain about this comment
***Perhaps it would be best for Obama not to win this election, to come back in 2012 or 2016, when he is more experienced, when the situation could be more conducive for change to occur, then we would trully, given the proper circumstances whether Obama can 'change' the World.***
Let me tell you about the McCain America has seen:
* When Russia invaded Georgia, the "experienced" McCain threatened to throw Russia out of the G8, throw it out of the WTO, etc.
Tell me, is this a wise thing to say to a country who can lob intercontinental nukes at you?
Obama, by contrast, wisely left the matter to the Bush Administration to address (He had the good sense to remember that he hadn't been elected to the office yet.)
* When Lehman Brothers fell, McCain wanted to fire Securities & Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox (even though the President lacks the power to do such a thing.)
Obama, by contrast, wisely left the matter to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Paulson, the people who were closest to the situation.
* When the Wall St. bailout bill was being written, McCain suspended his campaign to work on the bill (And after Washington told him that there was nothing for him to do, he went right back to campaigning.)
Obama, by contrast, was able to keep in touch with Washington from the campaign trail. Unlike Senator McCain, he didn't feel the need to suspend his campaign for a fool's errand.
* John McCain doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites. (Is THIS someone you want representing you at a Middle East peace conference?)
Surely someone as "experienced" as John McCain would have better sense than to run around like a chicken with its head cut off in the midst of a crisis.
It is obvious that the US and the UK are seeing two different John McCains. For all his "experience", his judgment leaves something to be desired.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Perhaps it would be best for Obama not to win this election, to come back in 2012 or 2016, when he is more experienced, when the situation could be more conducive for change to occur, then we would trully, given the proper circumstances whether Obama can 'change' the World.
Let me tell you about the McCain America has seen:
* When Russia invaded Georgia, the "experienced" McCain threatened to throw Russia out of the G8, throw it out of the WTO, etc.
Tell me, is this a wise thing to say to a country who can lob intercontinental nukes at you?
Obama, by contrast, wisely left the matter to the Bush Administration to address (He had the good sense to remember that he hadn't been elected to the office yet.)
* When Lehman Brothers fell, McCain wanted to fire Securities & Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox (even though the President lacks the power to do such a thing.)
Obama, by contrast, wisely left the matter to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Paulson, the people who were closest to the situation.
* When the Wall St. bailout bill was being written, McCain suspended his campaign to work on the bill (And after Washington told him that there was nothing for him to do, he went right back to campaigning.)
Obama, by contrast, was able to keep in touch with Washington from the campaign trail. Unlike Senator McCain, he didn't feel the need to suspend his campaign for a fool's errand.
* John McCain doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites. (Is THIS someone you want representing you at a Middle East peace conference?)
Surely someone as "experienced" as John McCain would have better sense than to run around like a chicken with its head cut off in the midst of a crisis.
It is obvious that the US and the UK are seeing two different John McCains. For all his "experience", his judgment leaves something to be desired.
Complain about this comment
And what about people taking on loads too much debt? Why have you missed that out?
Oh sorry, I remember now - that's all the government's fault isn't it?
I think you were inadvertently right there. A bit of personal responsibility. Not a left-wing view-point at all. You might want to watch that.
Gordon Brown, for example, is personally responsible for doubling national debt even before his bailing out of the banks. He's personally responsible for a structural 3% of national deficit per year to pay for his past borrowing and to pay the salaries of the million or so well-paid 'jobs' he's invented since 2001. ANd that's in the boom years. It'll be closer to 8 or 10% before we see the other side of the Brown Bust. He'll have quadrupled national debt - or at least the inevitable consequences of his mismanagement will a quadrupling (Cameron will have little choice either) - before we're finished.
He promised, in writing, an end to boom and bust. And what did we get. The mother of all boom and busts.
But when reality sets in and the borrowing has to stop whose fault is it? Well, if you're Gordon Brown it's all the American's fault. And there's no end of his apologists who'll cheerfully repeat the canard.
No personal responsibility see. Very Old Labour. Same with this class war.
The greatest crime of this Labour government (apart from destroying the economy and the Iraq war obviously - actually the Iraq war is probably a lesser crime) is to perpetuate this class war. A massive working majority and they still can't find it in their hearts to tell people the truth. Which is: If you want the best for your kids then you'll have to put a little work in yourself. If they come home from school unable to read then sit down and teach them yourself. If they come home unable to do simple maths then sit down and teach them yourself.
Do NOT buy them a new DS and absolve yourself of all responsibility having convinced yourself that buying them presents constitutes the limit of your parental duty. You are just perpetuating the idiocy.
Those rich kids at school didn't do better because their parents could afford to buy them an Action Man or a new bike (are you listening Prescott?). They did better because their parents sat down with them and practised their spelling and their tables. Aye, even when they whined that the snotty kids from the council estate didn't have to sit down and practice. No, they were allowed to run wild in the streets and play football.
They didn't pass their 11+ because they had a new Evil Kneivel stunt bike. They passed their 11+ because their parents went and got past papers from the educational suppliers and practiced, practised, practised. Same way they got all 'A's in their 'O' Levels and 'A' Levels. And a Grade VII in piano. And selected for the swim team and the rugby team.
But they don't want to hear that. They want to hear how it was the result of an elitist education system that excluded the 'poor'. They want to hear how it's not their fault. It's all the rich, elitist Tories fault.
Vote Labour. Preserve the status quo.
Complain about this comment
122 Sagamix
Good stealth attempt to re-open your toff attack ;-)
I'll double and quits you:
Labour leadership drawn from a small pool of ex-facial hair dudes
Complain about this comment
Hullo! a quick personal statement from a brit in Canada, but near the border! If you posters could only be here, watching and listening to the utter tosh, bias, and simmering undercurrent of racism from "highly respected" news organisations, you'd be shouting at the telly and demanding that your licence fee be refunded forthwith! Can't do that here see? Right now,one has to sit through in just the political sphere, an old man in braces (CNN), every question written in BIG writing, and look Larry, you don't HAVE to hear the whole answer, as we will cut to a commercial every 10 seconds, we'll be right back! treating candidates, pundits etc like celebs, and you KNOW that every celebrity's opinion is worth listening to! then you have Fox News, the type of news organisation that has anchors saying (actually heard by me) that they wondered (in reference to Joe the Plumber) if Barack Obama knew anything about plumbing? In the toilet? reply = " I wonder if Obama knows what one of those is!" What a hoot! Of course they then decided that they would take his campaign's money and air his infommercial!Hilarious eh? If that epithet had been aired on the BBC , the presenter concerned would very likely have been arrested forthwith! It goes on, the lies, half-truths, innuendo, Cyndi McCain yesterday on TV repeating absolute untruths, the old lady at the McCain rally who told him she wouldn't be voting for Obama as hes "an Arab" If it were at all possible, you would have seen McCain whiten some more, as he panicked open mouthed not only at the slur, but at the fact that she had sent out 400 leaflets, on her own admission, telling his supporters just that too!"My friends" the border is about 40 minutes away, far enough so that the madness is kept on the other side thank you very much!Finally, have i missed something, or am i naive in the extreme? if so, bloody well beam me up Scotty, as Sarah Palin must be using some sort of mind trick on the US. The woman can barely repeat what the men in grey have tried parrot fashion to drum into her!Imbicile is not too strong a word to use is it? The lady is a Ghastly inept choice and could not even tell of the newspaper she read? The (Alaskan)Daily News co-incidentally supported Obama after that!not to mention the $150,000 on clothes, oops! we've been found out....erm...ok we'll say that they are to be returned after!Genius! or that she is dragging her entire family around at Johnny's campaign expense account! yada yada yada it goes on and on, so i won't! be grateful folks, that you live where you live and the rest of us would like to!
Complain about this comment
You can't keep doing that - it's as bad as somebody continually posting the famous George Osborne Bullingdon Club photo or something ...
Or, rather embarrasingly this....
Labour Manifesto 1997
Security in housing....
We will reject the boom and bust policies which caused the collapse of the housing market.
Of course we now appreciate this really meant 'We will invent some new boom and bust policies of our own. Only ours will be boomier and bustier. Until it busts. Then we'll blame the Americans'.
Or This - from the same discredited manifesto...
Spending and tax: new Labour's approach
The myth that the solution to every problem is increased spending has been comprehensively dispelled under the Conservatives. Spending has risen. But more spending has brought neither greater fairness nor less poverty. Quite the reverse - our society is more divided than it has been for generations. The level of public spending is no longer the best measure of the effectiveness of government action in the public interest. It is what money is actually spent on that counts more than how much money is spent.
Ho ho ho.
The national debt has doubled under John Major.
Now it's doubled under Gordon Brown.
The public finances remain weak. A new Labour government will give immediate high priority to seeing how public money can be better used.
New Labour will be wise spenders, not big spenders.
Bwahahahaha.
And because efficiency and value for money are central, ministers will be required to save before they spend.
Save to invest is our approach, not tax and spend.
Bwahahahahahaha.
But it's all the Americans fault. And the Eton elite wot done it.
Laughable isn't it? But you can still get literate people who'll swallow it hook, line and sinker and peddle it on websites and doorsteps without a hint of embarrassment.
For shame.
Complain about this comment
The one thing both candidates need to be commended on is their ability to make people want to go out and vote.
Let's all hope that by the time of the next election, we in the UK will also be inspired to rush out and queue to exercise our franchise.
Personally I am a little disillusioned with UK yah-boo politics. Bring on someone who actually articulates what he wants to do with the country, rather than the cynical follow-the-band wagon politics we currently have.
True leaders don't have to ask people where they are going in order to be able to lead them...
Complain about this comment
Poor show in the States, isn't it? - an average of 4 or 5 hours to vote! Lucky that people seem so motivated to exercise their democratic right.
Bodes well for Obama, I'd say - hard to see that someone would queue all day to vote for John McCain.
But let's see.
Complain about this comment
123 Sagamix
Well not quite as bad.....
Let's not forget that that the financial crisis will cost a lot of people very, very dearly - we've already had suicides...
....there are also a lot of families who are very worried out there at the moment. (Gordon in denial over the UK's contribution to the economic crash will make escape from recession longer, harder and more painful for the average man on the street - since we won't be tackling the root causes)
The Bullingdon photo's, whilst they may worry a lot of people, I doubt they'd keep anyone awake at night in quite the same way.
When it comes to the general election I wonder of our recent party leaders whose legacy is going to impact voters the most:
1. Iraq - Tony Blair
2. Economic Crash - Gordon Brown
3. Bullingdon Club - David Cameron
4. Something of the night about him - Michael Howard
Complain about this comment
More, from the enduring testament to Labour incompetence, the 1997 Labour manifesto...
Since 1992 the typical family has paid more than £2,000 in extra taxes - the biggest tax hike in peacetime history, breaking every promise made by John Major at the last election. The tragedy is that those hardest hit are least able to pay.
This, from the man who sat down to rapturous applause from his economically dysphasic back-bench when he announced a doubling of income tax on the lowest paid.
As a source of comedy the 1997 manifesto just keeps on giving and giving....
Complain about this comment
herb @ 114
I have no sympathy for extreme right or extreme left wing views.
But I could have sworn that, when you were tuga, you were a loud and proud right wing extremist.
What on earth has happened?
Complain about this comment
I am an American. I am also the daughter of a British citizen. I have just returned from voting for Obama. My son, age 19, just voted in his first Presidential election. He too voted for Obama. My entire white family is voting for Obama. We are excited. I do believe this is a movement into the future.
Having said that, I am curious about European curiosity with our election. I hope your curiosity has nothing to do with race. Of course, the US has never elected a black president before; but, neither has the UK, France, Germany, Italy, ... need I go on.
Complain about this comment
Yet more....
No risks with inflation
We will match the current target for low and stable inflation of 2. 5 per cent or less. We will reform the Bank of England to ensure that decision-making on monetary policy is more effective, open, accountable and free from short-term political manipulation.
This from the man that changed the inflation proxy from RPI to CPI to deliberately exclude even the tiniest feedback from ballooning house prices. Thus justifying insanely low interest rates while house prices accelerated into the stratosphere. Because he knew the 'feel-good' wealth factor of your average British voter would result in a consumer binge and the appearance of a functioning economy.
He gave the banks and the voters enough rope and they duly went out and strung themselves up. But it's all the Americans fault.
I'm amazed they haven't done a better job of suppressing that 1997 manifesto. They have no trouble at all re-jigging the ONS stats to suit them.
Complain about this comment
Yet more....
Life in our countryside
Labour recognises the special needs of people who live and work in rural areas. The Conservatives do not. Public services and transport services in rural areas must not be allowed to deteriorate. The Conservatives have tried to privatise the Post Office. We opposed that, in favour of a public Post Office providing a comprehensive service.
This, from the government that has privatised the Post Office and is now standing by as Rural Post Offices are decimated.
If you or I were to break our written guarantees like this lot we'd be bankrupted and jailed. Actually, they've done a pretty thorough job of bankrupting us all.
Although it's all the American's fault of course.
I wonder how Obama is going to react tomorrow when he finds out that the UK Prime-minister blames the UK's inability to govern properly on Democrat voters who stand to lose their homes because they took out a NINJA loan. Instead of on Gordon Brown's home-grown inability to have the first clue about economics.
Complain about this comment
Just the facts.
That'll make a welcome change from the feng shui we've come to expect. When do you plan to start?
Complain about this comment
however just as the BNP deny membership of their racist party to non-whites,
I bet they don't. Only the NBPA is allowed to do something like that. Otherwise it's racism.
Complain about this comment
70.getridofgordonnow
"this just in: uk government tells pet owners they should let their pets go to the toilet, and should provide "entertainment" and "mental stimulation""
Anyone looked in The Griaudian for the relevant £80k p.a. Feline Convenience Inspectors and Psychological Innovation Monitors?
Complain about this comment
#78
But let not facts interrupt the feeding frenzy on capitalism
But you don't understand. It has to be somebody else's fault. Sure, Gordon Brown has been in power for over a decade and sure, national debt has doubled even before we really get into a recession/depression. But you have to understand how these Labour apparatchik's mind's work.
It's all gone wrong. Demonstrably. On Labour's watch. They promised an end to boom and bust. They denied, denied and denied again we were in an unsustainable housing boom. They treated any caution about the accelerating budget deficits with contempt. Boasting that they weren't deficits. Nooooo. They're 'investment'. Funny, looks like a deficit to me.
ANd now that the banks have finally sobered up and stopped lending insane amounts to Benny-from-Crossroads-alikes world-wide whose fault is the recession?
The banks. They've stopped lending. The American hill-billies for borrowing too much.
Who is emphatically not to blame?
Gordon Brown. Labour. Nothing to do with them. Couldn't be foreseen. All the American's fault. A 'failure' of Capitalism.
And there was me thinking it was a failure of this incompetent Labour government to manage the UK economy.
Which of course it is/was. Blaming 'capitalism' is just chaff. I don't choose a government to ram their university-level left/right orthodox doctrine down my throat. I choose a government to do a competent job and not screw up.
Well, this one has screwed up. Wilfully. For a full decade. It didn't just fail to fix the roof. It nicked the lead and then sold it at 10p in the pound to the Chinese.
And blaming the yanks, the banks, 'capitalism', Uncle Tom Cobbley and all doesn't detract from the fact that they sat there for over a decade and let it happen right in front of their nose.
Happily claiming political credit when the insane borrowing was creating the illusion of a vibrant economy and then it's Teflon shoulders time when it grinds to a halt.
Who? Me Guv? It wasnae me? Doubles national debt in a BOOM and then denies insane borrowing-fuelled boom had anything to do with him.
Pull the other one.
Failure of capitalism. Failure of Gordon Brown and his government I think you'll find.
Complain about this comment
Could your views be more obnoxious and insulting.
The truth hurts does it?
You condemn 10s of thousands of people virtually none of whom you know alleging stereotypical behaviour in the said people as you stereotype them to your hearts content.
Since we lack the time here to get into individual cases then you'll have to make do with the broad mind-set I'm alluding to old chap. I think you'll find it's not 10,000's who share the mindset. It's millions.
Luckily for Labour.
No political mileage for them in pointing it out of course. They must all be encouraged to embrace their victimhood. The BBC and John Prescott are in full swing as we speak.
It wouldn't do to appraise them that while they may have been let down by the aspirations of their own parents and schools it doesn't mean they have to similarly crush the aspirations and potential of their own kids. Write them off before they ever start as it all being a futile exercise because the 'elite' will just keep you down.
Gotta keep that class war going.
The yanks are (probably) in the process of electing a black President, the whole country is pleased for Lewis Hamilton but you'll still get no end of folks making political capital, indeed a good 'living' telling black folk how they're all oppressed and the 'elite' are working tirelessly night and day to keep them down. In truth, the main thing keeping them down is the poverty of ambition of their parents, their teachers and the 'victim' indoctrination their political 'leaders' have brain-washed them to believe.
Same with this class war.
Complain about this comment
#16 To Jonathan_Cook @16, well said mate, well said......short, sweet n' sour and brilliantly uncomfortable - think someone from the Tory or Labour benches read it :-)
Pretty sure thats whats gonna happen..."New US Prez, new direction, history being made - rah!rah!" What a load of BS and as Nick says "Everyone would want to be the next US President's new best friends."
So guess Dave n' Gordy better hurry up or Merkel or Sarkozy might beat 'em to it!
Complain about this comment
#121 phoenixetc
Yes, we have to tread a fine line. There are so many things that are glaringly obvious, but we can't just utter them.
Who is U9461192 I wonder? He seems to be monopolozing the posts whilst the mods are on strike, or having a tea break, or queueing up for pay day. Somebody ought to tell him how to get a proper ID.
For those who might be interested, and there's little else going on at the moment, so I'll tell you anyway since I'm a perverse so and so, I'm nursing a cold. It's only a cold, since I've had my flu jab, and I don't mind them, and I'm sitting here in the hotel lobby using free broadband and supping a glass of Lagavulin, the second best malt. Thought, can you advertise on BBC?
The best thing? The whisky is complimentary 'cos I've stayed here so many nights.
I'm winning, even if nobody else is.
Complain about this comment
re: 117, jonathan _cook
Well said, jonathan_cook,
Nu-Labour are running amok...
With their 'fiscal rules'
They must think we are fools
(We're not, except that charlatan Chuck!)
Complain about this comment
#126 phoenix etc
I find this all the time. First this blog doesn't have spellcheck, so anything you type just gets taken on.
Second, like you, I bash away and with fat fingers like mine I hit the wong key, or two keys simultaneaously, and that's wihtout the odd "sticky" key occurring, where it never prints unless you hit it with exceptional force.
Finally, I'm working in Europe, and coping with a German keyboard.
I'm amazed anyone can read my posts sometimes. Since I often get feedback from Sagamix, Balhamu, Eatonrifle, Grandantidote and TAG, I presume they've got some old enigma machines tucked away somewhere, and can decode everything.
Complain about this comment
125 Eatonrifle
Reference your comments at 104.
I can see how that comment has got your back up, although, I don't speak for U1011932 - I thought I'd make an attempt at interpretation......
I think I get the gist of where he/she was trying to head (OK - very clumsily - given on a blog like this you need to be as clear as possible).
I think U34324 was trying to say that you can educate your kids for free. I think U342535 was trying to say you can give your kids many of the same 'advantages' as public school kids - if you look around.
U3345323's post spoke to me. I am from a working class family. My parents cajoled me to join the organisations U323423 mentioned and many others. I learnt a lot from those outside of school organisations, more than I did at school (effectively I learnt character, attitude and confidence etc - the sort of thing public school gives people)
So although U112324325's post was harshly worded, I think the gist he / she was to try point out was that if you don't go to public school, well that needn't be a blocker in the UK.
Lastly - if more parents were made aware of the benefits of some of these free outside of school organisations, then maybe that would be a good thing.
Complain about this comment
Could I make a general request to any posters to stop encouraging the buddhist in any way.
Last week, again, a post of mine was rejected. It only menioned three words of his from a previous post - simple, nothing and go. Ok, so I emphasised Go, but nobody's perfect.
This was rejected by the mods, and it must have been at that poor sensitive soúl's instigation, unless one of you is a secret hardwedge lover. Own up, who is it?
This may of course get rejected, we'll see.
Complain about this comment
127 Eaton rifle....
Well if people continue to believe and post that Brown has had zero impact on our current economic crash............. well it just saves time to point out articles which describe reality.
I seem to be fighting repetition with repetition.
Brown isn't 100% innocent. Shame - after the first 3 months of his premiership I actually thought, maybe Brown is OK and has just been surpressed by the evil Tony Blair all this time.
Experience tells me, however, that Brown is actually worse for the country than Blair ever was.
Be prepared to see the same content again - if we get people making crass comments about bankers and the public to blame whilst inferring that Gordon is spotless. (it is more boring for me having to point our reality all the time - I can assure you).
Complain about this comment
#137 Sagamix
At the risk of getting rejected, it takes them that long to read the ballot paper, and figure out how to spell X.
Tee hee (joke).
Complain about this comment
Right, this is my first post related to the thread.
I'm in Germany, and my only english language TV connection is with BBC World. Don't get me started on how irate I am about this, using all our licence money to fund it.
Here's my point. In the past week, no matter what the opinion poll ratings are, commentators are bending over backwards to give the impression that McCain might win it. I suppose its a CYA operation in case of a Dewey effect (Gov Dewey was expected to walk the 1948 election, and didn't), but please, give the audience some credit for being grown up.
Anyway, although I should naturally opt for a Republican, in this case I can't, and hope Obama wipes the floor with them.
Gotta sign off now, some Japanese lady wants the machine.
Complain about this comment
re: 132, U9461192
Spot on. If only the masses would take heed.
Complain about this comment
141 Patrahan
Well - speaking for myself, I'm hoping and looking forward to an Obama presidency.
Bush - and even previous presidents - have seemed so arrogant and isolated concerning world issues.
For me Obama is necessary. If we are to stop World War 3 kicking off, then we need a move away from the traditional American president and towards something different. So - yes - CHANGE.
Obama carries himself well, I'm sure he listens as much as he spouts forth opinion. (Which is good).
Obama, however, is a gamble. He is hugely unproven - but seems more worldly wise than any president I remember.
Enjoy your day.
Complain about this comment
139 U941q234
I saved an original copy of the 1997 manifesto. I'm going to have to find it and read it!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
This foreign election is totally irrelevant in UK terms.
No matter who wins, the victor will have American interests at heart.
Our PM, on the other hand, will be wishing that he had two noses for the purposes of simultaneous proctological exploration of both the POTUS and of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.
Please address the election that matters: Glenrothes.
Complain about this comment
147 U546346
If you listen to the election spiel pre 1997 - Brown knew what to and what not to do once in government.
........... then he just whizzed the whole economic management thing away!
As for Labour's search for economic scapegoats ............ I'm tempted to laugh......... but then I personally am OK financially whereas I know millions of others are in deep, deep, deep mess because of Labour. That is unforgivable.
Complain about this comment
fom @ 128
you seem to forget that it is only recently that the government - yes the setter of permitted financial frameworks - have tolerated financial institutions doing stupid things.
Mmmm, not so sure about that. We had a crazy little property bubble in the late eighties, I seem to recall. Any case, that's not the point I'm making.
Which is? ... well, that it's a nonsense to place most of the blame for the private sector credit bubble on the government.
Some of the blame, sure - maybe 20 pc or so - but not most of it. It's people, banks, the market, the City bonus culture, incompetent regulators competing for the other 80 pc.
I'm right, aren't I? C'mon you know I am.
And all this class stuff is nonsense.
That's a statement of how we'd like things to be rather than how they are.
Wishful thinking, in other words.
Complain about this comment
PATRAHAN @141:
History is about to be made in the space of 3 days. The first black winner of The F1 Motor Racing World Championship and the first ever Black President. Amazing! Things can only get better!
Complain about this comment
#15 herb
Quite right - I think Mandelson must be responsible for sidetracking the BBC on trivial matters like the US election (is there really an election? I suspect it is all a conspiracy by the NuLabore supporting BBC to distract us), rather than writing an article about how Brown is such a disgrace, has destroyed the country etc etc
Complain about this comment
Just thought there might be a need for an interpreter in U speak:
even when they whined that the snotty kids from the council estate didn't have to sit down and practice. No, they were allowed to run wild in the streets and play football.
aka
... rich people are better parents!
only the NBPA is allowed to do something like that. Otherwise it's racism.
aka
... blacks get preferential treatment!
No charge.
Complain about this comment
Is there no aspect of our lives that Labour won't interfere in?
You read it right peeps. An eight-week consultation period.
Thanks Wasteminster.
Another reason not to vote Labour. How many more do we need? Bring on the election.
Complain about this comment
the U Bend @ 142
This from the man that changed the inflation proxy from RPI to CPI to deliberately exclude even the tiniest feedback from ballooning house prices. Thus justifying insanely low interest rates while house prices accelerated into the stratosphere. Because he knew the 'feel-good' wealth factor of your average British voter would result in a consumer binge and the appearance of a functioning economy
Wow. So, not the bumbling, indecisive fool we thought we were getting to know and love, but rather a veritable Dr Devious! - has even the best of the Bond movies featured such an Evil Genius? ...
Complain about this comment
Once Obama wins - will Tony Blair be sacked as peace envoy / war-lord to the Middle East?
If we are being charitable - then Blair acted as a brake (not a very good one) to Bush.
With Obama in situ - well we won't need Blair as 'peace envoy' will we.
Tony instead can continue to give lectures for dollars to Texans.
Oh yeah and after the 12 million pounds Tony has made, it is time Gordon to hit Blair for a windfall tax. It'd pay for some "Gordon-Brown-(TM)-economic-crisis- loft-lagging" for a few thousand people if nothing else.
Complain about this comment
@ 150
There are so many things that are glaringly obvious
You're so very right, herb ...
Complain about this comment
150. At 8:53pm on 04 Nov 2008, herb_igone_ex_tuga wrote:
#121 phoenixetc
.......
Who is U9461192 I wonder? He seems to be monopolozing the posts whilst the mods are on strike, or having a tea break, or queueing up for pay day. Somebody ought to tell him how to get a proper ID.
Maybe he is another guy who has received am asbo and hasn't yet worked out why or what he has to do to get a valid ID. Of course it could be a wily trick, do mods ever go on strike or have tea breaks, etc?
I'm a nosy parker, why are you at a hotel at this time of the year? Cheaper than heating the old homestead? Seriously, hope your cold gets better quickly. I didn't have a flu jab, did once and I was really ill, so risk getting the flu and having a few nice days laying in bed with a good book. Have noticed most of the angry brigade have abandoned their posts, perhaps they are having a pray-in for Obama (silly joke)!
Complain about this comment
#97 jonathan
Eton teaches 1,300 boys aged 13-18
There are 3,879,000 children aged 13-18 in the UK, 2,000,000 of whom are male.
So 0.065% of boys attend Eton and 0.03% of all children (as it only admits males).
That's 6.5 boys in every 10,000.
I think this was the point that sagamix was making, rather than it's a problem because it is Eton per se, or rehearsing the familiar "Tory Toff" argument.
While there are only 2 Old Etonians in the 23-strong top Shadow Cabinet team (only 9%) - down from 4 (17%) since the departures of Hugo Swire and Super Boris, a third of Shadow Minister's were educated there (so only 1000 times more than the % of the population that are Old Etonians).
If Brown had recruited a third of Ministers in the Government from his peers at Kirkaldy High School I'm sure you would think drawing so many Ministers from such a narrow background to be undesirable.
One danger I can think of is Group Think. It would benefit the future Government hugely if they made themselves more representative, and I think Cameron acknowledges this
Complain about this comment
#97 jonathan
Eton teaches 1,300 boys aged 13-18.
There are 3,879,000 children aged 13-18 in the UK, 2,000,000 of whom are male.
So 0.065% of boys attend Eton and 0.03% of all children (as it only admits males).
That's 6.5 boys in every 10,000.
I think this was the point that sagamix was making, rather than it's a problem because it is Eton per se, or rehearsing the familiar "Tory Toff" argument.
While there are only 2 Old Etonians in the 23-strong top Shadow Cabinet team (only 9%) - down from 4 (17%) since the departures of Hugo Swire and Super Boris, a third of Shadow Minister's were educated there (so only 1000 times more than the % of the population that are Old Etonians).
If Brown had recruited a third of Ministers in the Government from his peers at Kirkaldy High School I'm sure you would think drawing so many Ministers from such a narrow background to be undesirable.
One danger I can think of is Group Think. It would benefit the future Government hugely if they made themselves more representative, and I think Cameron acknowledges this
Complain about this comment
Stories of America's demise have been greatly exaggerated.
Hopefully Senator Obama will become POTUS, and thus set in train another glorious chapter in American history.
I have a huge affection for the place and its people, having visited annually since 1987 or so.
The Bush adminstration made some fatal missteps which have damaged America's standing in the world.
But we know, or should know, that Americans are good people who will always ultimately do the right thing.
I expect an Obama Presidency to be 'kinder' to Americans who fall on hard times.
If Americans had the sort of 'safety net' that we have, they'd think they were in paradise.
Tomorrow is another day but not just any other day.
Complain about this comment
141 - patrahan
the race thing seems to be far more of an american issue, considering how high african american turn out is this year - europeans just don't want a republican
i remember one of the americans on the unruly question time US show - "only in america could a working class black man become leader" - completely ignoring the fact that America has a far higher number of black people and much deeper racial issues than much of the rest of the west, she also seemed to ignore plenty of african presidents...
Complain about this comment
132. At 7:21pm on 04 Nov 2008, U9461192 wrote:
And what about people taking on loads too much debt? Why have you missed that out?
They made me do it, Mummy!
Complain about this comment
to 157 - you probably won't see this but just to point out, BBC world is not public funded - it's commercial, things that are funded by the licence fee are only available to british audiences
BBC world is awful tho
Complain about this comment
154. You are right I am sure about that person reporting posts to the mods. Is anybody here interested in them witterin g on about buddism? No, thought not.
He has a problem and is rather a weird character. Sad.
Complain about this comment
148#U6455443
You seem to think an overwhelming number (millions your words) of ordinary parents couldn't give a fig about their kids education and future.
I'd say a very small minority fit your depressing description and I doubt if that has much to do with politis tbh of either party.
I'm getting the impression you have a mrntal image of people drinking themselves senseless, puking all over the place, brawling and not giving toss for the consequences.
Remind you of anyone?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/oct/18/toryleadership2005.conservatives3
Just in case you don't follow the link, here's a clue.
"Cameron took a similar line in an interview with the Times last weekend. "The truth is my father was chairman and the only thing I really do there is, I go and have lunch with him. I don't believe we have to have a country where you can't have independent organisations deciding what they want to be."
Fair enough. But White's ancient reputation for a calculated brand of hedonism is actively pursued by members of the Bullingdon. It is a small club, with only around 20 members at any one time. It costs "an awful lot to join", according to one student at Oxford. Non-Etonians are not necessarily barred from membership, but it helps to have attended the school.
Most Oxford drinking clubs "meet up in someone's room and drink themselves stupid," explains Roger Waite, a student at Lincoln College. Even the Claret Club for ex-Etonians tends to focus on the consumption of alcohol. The Bullingdon is subtly different. For a start, it maintains an extraordinary secrecy: most undergraduates have no idea who is a member. New applicants have their rooms ritually trashed and are then required to organise one of the club's infamous jaunts.
The routine is fairly predictable. Members, wearing tailcoats, go out for a meal at a location outside Oxford. They smash up the bottles and some of the surroundings, and then attempt to pay off the barman. Sometimes this works. Occasionally, as it seems happened at the White Hart pub in Fyfield in December last year, it doesn't.
Fourteen members of the society booked a room in the pub under a false name, stating in advance that they would not be eating any pudding. Once their main course was served, the undergraduates began to brawl, throwing bottles and food at each other and smashing a window as staff forced them out through the fire exit."
Of course if its Old Etonians its high jinx, anyone else give them an ASBO.
Complain about this comment
124. You spell centre as center. That's enough for me and the rest of us.
Complain about this comment
153#JCook
Nice try JC but if you look at 148 where U4344466 speaks for himself its now millions of parents!
A bit extreme IMO and not a little scary when people see themselves as so superior.
Complain about this comment
160#JCook
I bought a copyf the Cameron's Tory Manifesto of 2005, but to avoid embarrasment I wrapped it in a copy of "Razzle" when I walked out of the newsagent ;-)
Complain about this comment
163 Sagamix
Well - I'm glad you've appeared to move from zero percent blame for Brown to 20%...!!
That is a first step.
As for the other 80% - how would you aportion blame across so many financial organisations and members of the public? 0.00045% blame for each per person or company?!!!
Unfortunately, monsieur. it is time to wake up to the fact that Labour has been in charge of the country for 11 years.
Labour has not been powerless during this time.
Pre 1997 - Brown talked the talk. He explained very clearly what needed to be controlled and why. Once in government - Brown appears to have had a brain meltdown (since 2001 at least).
Whilst events will have conspired against Labour - we paid Tony and Gordon to lead the country. They have failed (and failed expensively).
Majority blame, however you slice it, goes to our Labour leaders.
Complain about this comment
165 Balhamu
Well - on a similar subject - we know that Labour timed the Glenrothes by-election so that the entire build up and result will be 'buried' within the US election news in the media.
The Conservatives pulled off a similar trick at Henley (although a much smaller spin job - because the Tories are fundamentally rubbish at spin). i.e. The Conservatives timed the Henley by-election to be held on the anniversary of Gordon's first year as PM in order to ruin his party in the press.
Complain about this comment
Goodnight children everywhere!
Complain about this comment
I'm relieved that George W Bush is finally history - and not a day too soon.
If the US can change it's leader at athis timeof global financial crisis, why couldn't the UK ?
Over to you Gordon ........ I'll be relieved when you are history too.
Complain about this comment
If people want to leave discussion and start getting into libel and insults, it gets referred ever time and upheld. If you don't like the outcome don't do it.
As for the rest of your comment, I prefer reading stuff that stands up on its own and has a reasonable attitude. Anything else isn't worth bothering with.
As Sagamix comments, holding the Tories small DNA pool to account is doing them a favour. Hence, the Buddhist phrase: "There are no accidents".
Complain about this comment
re: 166, sagamix
aka
... rich people are better parents!
How about: better parents are more likely to be rich.
Complain about this comment
People wanted cost cutting and consumerism under Thatcher and Blair, so complaining because you got what you wanted is a bit rich. Things have changed, and sound law and better character is on the table. Some people are throwing a snit because they can't resolve their goals and realities.
I've just bought a new camera and like a putz I just discovered I could get a later and better model for the same price. But, it won't make me a better photographer. I'm a bit ticked off and could justify some whining but can see the benefit of getting over that and putting my effort into practicing proper photographic technique.
I've got some books on basic technique that cover lighting, apertures, shutter speeds, depth of field, and all that jazz. I've also looked more closely at composition and got a book on portraits, and looked into making a backdrop and related stuff. It's not a pain free curve but that goes with the turf.
Leaders and society can only do so much. The rest is down to us. That's *self* leadership.
Complain about this comment
I'm waiting to hear Brown tell the American people: "This is no time for a novice".
Brown - call an election.
Complain about this comment
re: 190, Maxsceptic
Well said Max.
Brown is toast.
Complain about this comment
What the people have to understand here
Is, the American election was the biggest
vote in history against conservative ideals.
This certainly Is "NO" time to be a conservative, they are well and truly dead
wood and will take decades to reform.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations Obama - great news.
Shame the BBC are soooooo fawning over Obama this morning (it is like 1997 on acid!)
If Labour wins at Glenrothes - let's hope that the Beeb aren't as sycophantic over Brown come Friday morning!!! ;-)
Complain about this comment
The Americans voted for change.
When do we get our chance to do the same?
The contrast between the popular mandate enjoyed by Obama from an open, free and fair competition; and Browns 'authority' from being handed his job by Blair is pretty startling.
Complain about this comment
derekbarker @192,
People shouldn't equate Democrats with Nu Labour or the European Left.
The Democrats are far more Conservative than you would wish. As you'll probably soon see.
Complain about this comment
I didn't think it would be too long before someone on here would take from this US Election result the supposed fact that by all accounts David Cameron and his party are dead in the water. You seem to forget the incompetence of the politicians at our helm and the fact that 11 years in power have made little difference to our perception of them and their party. (The majority of us that is). If anything it is a message that the men in power should be looking over their shoulders because it is they that the people are blaming for their present plight!
Many times in the past The US has had a Republican administration while we have had a Labour Government and vice versa. It means very little in the grand scheme of things.
In addition you cannot compare the 'Martin Luther King' style appeal of Obama with the dull approach of Gordon Brown. Of course in your dreams you can believe it is the end of Conservativism but you would be extremely misguided to do so in my humble view.
Complain about this comment
That's pretty much how I see things.
Complain about this comment
#194
Call that election any time, conservatives are gone to the books of history.
The whole world has took a swing to the left of politics and conservatives no longer have a part to play in a world that seeks peace, collective responsibility and an end to poverty.
Goodbye cons and Good riddings!
Complain about this comment
# 148
Total agreement.
America has today elected their new President Barack Obama who had a white mother and a black father. I have only heard him speak of 'family'.
It's been reported this morning that Tarique Ghaffur is to be given £300,000 to end his racism claim.
It's all about attitude.
Complain about this comment
172 Balhamu
You've been busy with the calculator.
So the Conservatives are at fault for having as many old Etonians (2) as Labour has Milibands (2) in the top cabinet team?
As for the rest of these Etonians - come on - let's have their names?
Seems to me that Labour-fans continually look for any excuse to try and bring out photos of the Bullingdon Club to throw some muck that they hope will stick.
That behaviour reminds me of Sarah Palin telling people that Obama had been "palling around with terrorists".
Like Sarah Palin, I think you'll find that banging on about "toffs" and "Etonians" might mobilise your electoral base - but it won't make a jot of difference to any of the people you need to vote for Labour to win the General Election.
P.S. Lucky David Miliband didn't promote Ruth Kelly from girlfriend to wife, otherwise the Labour Cabinet would have had an even smaller pool of perspectives to draw on ;-)
Complain about this comment
Max, PTTP etc
But your party supported McCain in case you hadn't noticed, like they supported Bush previously at US elections and had Arnie The Terminator at your conference.
Its all about judgement I guess
Complain about this comment
#197
C E H, we share the same hopes.
Your Sir, are a step ahead of everyone on
this blog.
Yes indeed, conservatives no more!
gone and endith with.
Complain about this comment
Novices seem to be in-big time!
With the world so significantly changed in the last few months, including the fresh start from across the pond, perhaps it is now time for own our Government here to consider the needs of it's electorate.
Complain about this comment
#197
This certainly Is "NO" time to be a conservative, they are well and truly dead wood and will take decades to reform.
That's pretty much how I see things.
The UK Tories don't need to reform. They just need to keep their gobs shut except when it comes to reminding everybody what an absolute catastrophe Brown has made of the UK economy. Which they should be doing at every opportunity. There is no need to propose any solutions. Simply bang on about the utter financial destruction and economic free-fall wrought by the present bunch of incompetents.
Doubled national debt. Budget deficits out of control going into a depression. House price crash. Repossessions. Negative equity. Unemployment going off the high board. Stock market in the toilet. Pensions in the toilet. Did I forget the Iraq
war?
Let's be honest, that's all Obama had to do.
All Cameron has to do is sit back and let the facts speak for themselves. This government is disingenuous to the very core of its being. It basked in the make-believe boom on an ocean of borrowed money with no thought for the consequences of their actions. We'd just borrow and print more money for ever and ever, Amen.
Any time anybody questioned where this money was coming from or how it was going to be paid back we got leering condesention from the likes of Brown and Milliband. Nasty, nasty people who couldn't possibly be so stupid that they didn't really know where the money was coming from or what the end-game would look like. Could they? Were they really sooooo stupid they thought money could be borrowed indefinitely in an ever-increasing inverted pyramid and nothing would go wrong? Did they think they'd discovered a secret formula of sustainable (but ever increasing borrowing) that had alluded financial discovery until 1997?
It's possible that is what they believed. Gordon Brown's high regard for his own cleverness is legendary.
Well, we are where we are. Obama ain't going to save the US and I don't see anything that will save the UK either. Sure, they'll probably print money - this is after all a Labour government and sure, it'll destroy the prudent, destroy the savers, destroy the pensioners on another ocean of devalued paper. Weimar Republic, here we come.
But never fear. There'll be no end of the intellectually challenged ready to leap up and claim it's all Margaret Thatcher's fault. A failure of capitalism. Instead of an unholy alliance of economic beserkers with Gordon Brown as it's annointed leader.
The election of Obama isn't a rejection of Conservatism. It's a rejection of George Bush. It is a rejection of utter incompetence. A revulsion at the sight of utter incompetence masquerading as strong and decisive leadership. And rightly so.
And when Brown gets crushed in the general election it won't be a rejection of Labour. It'll, likewise, be a rejection of utter destructive incompetence. The only sad part is we still have 18 months before we too can queue for 5 hours if necessary to get rid of him.
Complain about this comment
197 Charles_E_Hardwidge
No. I don't see it like that at all.
America has rejected Iraq and the incompetence that led to an Economic Crash - it wasn't a rejection of Republican politics.
There are parallels in the UK. We have already ejected Blair (Iraq) and next for the chop is Brown (Economic Crash).
Cameron is never going to be as motivational as Obama - but all he needs to do is to remind the public who got us into this mess and indicate the broad direction he is going to take to repair Britain and take us forwards again.
Thus - following the election in the US - you can't suddenly conclude that the whole word has turned left wing.
Complain about this comment
#204
"The election of Obama isn't a rejection of Consevatism"
O' yes it is the biggest rejection in history.
What part of this golbal economic crisis dont you get.
Fairy-low interest rates, low borrowing rates compared to the last tory admin,
will allow this government to borrow more
and recover faster.
It's the end of conservatism as we know it.
Call an election any-time, let Britain also bin
the British conservatives to the history books.
Complain about this comment
The BBC love telling us that the president is the leader of the free world.
He isn't of course, but the BBC likes giving away our power to the US for some reason.
However, beneath talk of being allies, having common goals, being spiritually entwined, there is the money.
And despite what people like to think, the real politics in this world is not done round the political table, but over the trade counter.
Companies big and little rely heavily on a trading relationship with the states.
So it is vital that our daft political leaders (those people who for some reason think they are important?) get on with who ever is in the white house.
It is not hypocrisy, it is simply good business. (That, and the fact that they would get a right old thumping from the business community if they didn't)
Complain about this comment
Fairy-low interest rates, low borrowing rates compared to the last tory admin,
will allow this government to borrow more
and recover faster.
Low borrowing rates compared to the last Tory administration? You're having a laugh.
They've doubled the national debt in the boom years. Now we're screaming into recession what do you think the borrowing rates will look like at the end of fiscal year 2009/2010? 8% of GDP? 10% of GDP? 15% of GDP? Any advance?
They were at 3% of GDP in the BOOM years. Now unemployment has gone into free-fall, the City is in free-fall, all those high salaries and bonuses (and their 40% tax) all wiped out. Banks profits (and the tax) all wiped out. Consumers sitting on what little money they have left trying to defer repossession for another couple of pay-days or until they too, in turn, get laid off.
It's a catastrophe. And it is all Gordon Brown's fault. He was the guy in charge of the money. He was the guy responsible for regulating the banks.
The economy is wrecked and Gordon Brown sat there and let it happen. On the rare afternoons when he wasn't actively wrecking it himself.
Complain about this comment
206
I think the point has been royally missed by many on this blog.
What the states voted for was change as they had seen, little or no move from the initial stance that Bush took when he entered office.
The same can be said of Brown, when he became PM, he promised a complete change from Blairs disasterous leadership. No more glitz, no more spin, Troops pulling out of War zones, Prudence.
He hasn't delivered the rhetoric is still the same as Blair. More so perhaps
Glitz - Jumping on every UK success as his he was the principle architect of it, Olympic Winners, Hamilton et al.
Spin - Bought back the Generals of Labour Spin Mandleson, Draper and Campbell
Troops - It has been stated that our just over 100 thousand soldiers (Nearly not an army but a militia) will be deployed further, if America bomb burst out of the middle east. Congo beckons.
Prudence - .......well.......
The biggest problem, Brown is a very scared man, knee jerks all over the place. It's quite frightening as you never know what he will do next.
I think it's time for a change. Sadly it won't happen till the last minute.
Complain about this comment
Hazel Blears comments on the media, blogs and politics, and the lurid and negative comment that springs from its ever shrinking base. The right wing and academics don't "get it".
She is correct to stand up for something better and acknowledge people from less "approved" backgrounds. It emphasises real issues and real people, and leaves fear and greed out in the cold.
The right wing love to throw spaghetti and drag people into a fight, but Labour "get" that the secret of success is *self* improvement. The real enemy isn't "out there" but inside yourself.
At least someone's paying attention.
Complain about this comment
Call an election any-time, let Britain also bin
the British conservatives to the history books.
On that we're in agreement. Things are only going to get worse from here. The best thing Gordon Brown can do for the future Labour party's election prospects is limit the amount of time the British electorate associate with his destruction of the economy.
Right now there are still a fair few people happy to see the yanks and the banks take the blame for Gordons destructive mismanagement. Yeah, class war, stick it to the rich elitist bankers. Yeah, blame the Americans. It's their fault we're in Iraq. See how their partisan minds work?
No thought about who had the power to just say 'No!'. In fact who was specifically elected to say 'No!'.
If Gordon lost an election now (and he should be used to losing elections by now) his apparatchiks would claim with a straight face that a recession never happened under this government. After all we haven't had the second quarter of 'negative growth'. YET. It's a nailed on certainty, barring major ONS rigging, but it hasn't happened YET.
It's still not too late to saddle the Tories with the massive deficits and unemployment that will be the inevitable result of Gordon Brown's squandered decade. Another 18 months though and even the hardest-of-thinking will have cottoned on to who was really to blame. And Labour will be utterly crushed just as the Republican Party has been crushed in order to teach George Bush a lesson.
Mind you, just like George Bush I don't expect Gordon will emerge with any humility or introspection when he is annihilated at the ballot box. He'll still be blaming the yanks. Or the banks. And there will still be a small, cynical, cabal of apologists keeping the faith and denying the truth.
Complain about this comment
#209
Change to what Harry! an elitist group that openly gives tax cuts to most wealthy in society? and also openly create's a low wage economy and high unemployment.
Harry, the conservatives are dead, no more, an end has come to their selfish ways.
Come and join the human race and make this world a better place. o']
Complain about this comment
#179 eatonrifle
You seem to think an overwhelming number (millions your words) of ordinary parents couldn't give a fig about their kids education and future.
Just to redress the balance a bit Eaton, I live in the country. I'm six miles away from the nearest town but if I went into town, as I did last night, I will always see some small children (under 10) walking the streets unaccompanied by any adults. This was after nine at night and I wonder if their parents know, or even care where they are.
These children's parents obviously don't give a fig about their education and future, otherwise they would be indoors at that time of night. If things don't change, these children's children will be out playing late at night in a few years' time. This is just one middle-sized town in Britain. How many more towns (and cities) in the UK have the same problem?
Complain about this comment
Now this is funny:
Downing Street insiders are hoping that, with Mr Brown's huge experience of ministerial office, he can become something of a mentor to the relatively inexperienced "leader of the free world".
Please shackle Brown down for all our sakes!
Maybe this is Brown's agenda for his master and pupil sessions:
1. Day 1 - Economic Crashes. Learning from my mistakes.
2. Day 2 - So you've made a series of massive mistakes. How do you lie and spin a positive line to the public?
3. Day 3 - Taxing pensions and the art of Stealth Taxes.
4. Day 4 - Taxing the poor - post 10p tax thinking.
5. Day 5 - Backstabbing. How to bring down your colleagues.
6. Day 6 - Defending you own back from plotters.
7. Day 7 - Profligate spending as investment
8. Day 8 - How to hide national debt
9. Day 9 - How to claim credit for good things and blame others for bad things
9. Day 10 - The importance of smiling
Complain about this comment
Echoing many previous posts, I think the government, and the BBC who seem to support it, have a real problem based upon the outcome of the US election.
Firts, the opinion polls were right. Although the beeb has been playing down the significance of Obama's lead, it was borne out. The tories are still in the lead here, so the omens aren't good for Labour.
Second, the nature of the government has been changed, no continuity, which again isn't a good omen for Labour.
bring it on.
Complain about this comment
#165 Balhamu
Obviously the US election was taking place, but it was being used partly as a smoke screen, keeping the focus off domestic problems, but now its out of the way, and all the attention can come back here.
Gordo's got nothing to hide behind.
Complain about this comment
Change to what Harry! an elitist group that openly gives tax cuts to most wealthy in society?
I think you'll find the Conservatives gave tax cuts to everybody. I think you'll find it was Gordon Brown who sat down to rapturous applause and banging of order papers when he doubled the tax on the poorest workers in society. This government's MPs are so incompetent they couldn't even figure out that doubling tax on the poorest was unlikely to be a vote-winner. This PM is so incompetent and disingenuous that he can't bring himself to admit he made a basic mathematical error.
and also openly create's a low wage economy and high unemployment.
Stick around. Thanks to Gordon Browns Homeric mismanagement of the economy we're about to enter a prolonged period of No wages and massive unemployment. Oh and record repossessions, record deficits, record borrowing and record unemployment unless they re-jig the ONS numbers even more.
And your pithy riposte to this economic debacle is that Cameron went to Eton. If that non-sequiter works with the electorate then we are truly doomed.
Complain about this comment
212
Sorry mate, just don't buy the elitist Toff angle.
If Labour could be accused of anything (Apart from being terribly Naieve and condesending), is the Nepotism within the Cabinet, The Millibands and Balls Families, The Flat Mates and Mentors, it's every bit as turgid as a posh school connection I'm afraid.
I'm no big lover over Cameron, but given the choice. Well, lets just say it aint gonna be Brown for me.
If you were trying to convince me to see you side of the arguement however. Don't do what Charlie did and Invoke Hazel Blears. There is a woman who is blissfully unaware that the house is on fire.
Complain about this comment
#177 Tarquin
I know they would have us believe that it is a "commercial" service, and self financing from the advertising revenue.
First, look at the advertisers, and guess how much they're willing to pay a minority service for carrying their ad.
Second, they've got bureaux all over the world, which have to be staffed, and for things like World Business Report which is not, as far as I'm aware, broadcast on the BBC News channel, have a cost base which proposes a challenge to the advertising revenue, to say the least.
Complain about this comment
It's heading that way as well.
Golly, you're sharp today.
Complain about this comment
214. jonathan_cook
That was my first throught too -- however, I think it is just badly expressed -- what they must mean is that maybe Obama can mentor Brown... its the only way it can make any sense at all...
Read that way it also highlights gordons 'delusion of grandure' - you know he was showing the world how to counter the 'global banking crisis' by buying all the banks, and every other nation would copy him... 'leader' ha ha.
Mind you Gordon does have moments of lucidness -- instead of beleiving that he could lead the world out of crisis, he has said that america must lead.
Complain about this comment
#214 jonathan_cook
Gordon needs to be best buddies with Obama. Success by association.
Complain about this comment
McCain loses and David Cameron + The Conservatives are consigned to the dustbin of history according to Charles and his daft friend. Obama polled 51% of the US vote. McCain polled 47%. If that spells the end of Conservatism then I've missed something. Over here DC's lead is 9%. I happen to be really pleased that Obama has achieved his dream but it doesn't guarrante that he is going to be a successful President. He has an enormous economic problem to face. God forbid he may even be bumped off by a fanatic before he can assume the mantle of power. I'm afraid any thought of a Conservative demise here because of what hapened across the water is pure wishful thinking.
Complain about this comment
Just as an add on whenever Hazel Blears speaks I either switch channels, mute the sound, or hum loudly. Is there anyone out there who does the same?
Complain about this comment
Yup. That's what I suggested yesterday. Obama may front it up and Cameron may try and squeeze in between like a gooseberry but that's how things are likely to be. Anyway, why shouldn't the world's most powerful man help out the US President from time to time?
Complain about this comment
163 sagamix wrote:
"fom @ 128
you seem to forget that it is only recently that the government - yes the setter of permitted financial frameworks - have tolerated financial institutions doing stupid things.
Mmmm, not so sure about that. We had a crazy little property bubble in the late eighties, I seem to recall. Any case, that's not the point I'm making.
Which is? ... well, that it's a nonsense to place most of the blame for the private sector credit bubble on the government.
Some of the blame, sure - maybe 20 pc or so - but not most of it. It's people, banks, the market, the City bonus culture, incompetent regulators competing for the other 80 pc.
I'm right, aren't I? C'mon you know I am."
Saga,
I agree that many afctors affect house prices.
I question your detachment of "independent regulators" from the Government. They are created by, and senior members are appointed by, Governments.
These two groups didn't blink when mortgages were being offered at rediculous muiltples of salary (sometimes self-certified i.e. "pretend" income), for enormous percentages of property value.
That could have been stopped in its tracks.
The bubble in the 80s wasa driven by demand (and fear that "if we don't get on the ladder now, we never will"). But borrowing conditions were still tight...
Brown said he wouldn't let that happen again. But DID permit cash to slop around. It's inevitable that, if the government says its OK, people push themselves to the limit to get a place of their own.
Was a time when it would be unthinkable to use a "mortgage" to buy holidays, TVs, consumables of any type.
Finance houses took incredible risks. That's not what you expect bankers to allow their customers to do - and certainly not what you expect bankers to do with their own resources.
They should self-regulate. If they don't, then independent regulators, leant on by government should make 'em...
That's my beef.
Housing supply remains comletely inadequate. No sign of that being tackled any time soon.
"Me: And all this class stuff is nonsense."
"Saga: That's a statement of how we'd like things to be rather than how they are.
Wishful thinking, in other words."
Hopeful thinking, I'd say.
The Prescott TV shows were fascinating. John P is of the generation that seeks class division and discrimination as a justification for changing the world. Most of the people he talked to seemed totally unconcerned about his stratification of society in that way.
If you're "born" a Tory or Labour - or LibDem - supporter, then you're born an idiot. Having wealth doesn't make you better or worse than someone else. Having aspirations for yourself or your children doesn't make you a subjugator of the poorer.
Cameron is the first leader of the Tories for 40 years who hasn't come from a fairly ordinary background. So what?
The only question should be "is he any good?".
Same question is largely applied across industry, when people apply for jobs.
The biggest failures of this government (IMHO) are an inability to manage finances and a lack of delivery in education.
That's nothing to do with class or even political philosophy. Just an appalling lack of self-discipline and a "classist" belief that "because we're in charge, we must be right". And "most of us haven't polluted ourselves, earning a crust by producing something that may be bought from the grubby masses' disposable income, so we have pure motives"...
Now that's a bubble of self-importance I'd truly like to burst.
Complain about this comment
Regarding 'schooling' and 'education'...
It was interesting to see the goverments 'social mobility' document.
The only way they could manipulate it to suggesting it was getting better was to base it on the number of GCSEs passed (not jobs done, not income etc).
However the report showed that we are only now getting back to where things were for those born in the 50's. There was a massive drop in mobility (by their definition) just around the introduction of comprehensive education! It has taken all this time to even approach the mobility that grammer schools enabled...
Messed up social mobility/education -- thats down to labour that is...
Complain about this comment
#184 jonathan
"The Tories are fundamentally rubbish at spin"
Really? What are you basing that on?
They seem to be quite good at getting their message out in the media in the exact form it left Conservative Central Office, and in setting the agenda for most of the media.
Labour get accused of spin no matter what. There is some truth in the accusation sometimes. Though even if they clearly have had a policy announcement plannedseveral months in advance, but a news story on the day is a big one, they are accused of spin. It's a strange concept - should Labour drop big announcements they have planned if there is a big news story?
A small example - the media in this country used to talk about "inheritance tax" (i.e. tax on people inheriting a lot of unearned wealth, which sounds fair to many). Now, following the example of Republicans in the states, the Conservatives have successfully spun the tax into a "death tax" (i.e. a tax on people dying, which sounds unfair to many). Even the BBC has began talking about it in this context, and swallowed the Conservative line that a tax affecting the wealthiest 10% of people is going to hit everyone.
Complain about this comment
#2234 sicilian
I just switch the thing off.
Complain about this comment
Anyway, why shouldn't the world's most powerful man help out the US President from time to time?
Bwahahahahaha. This delusion is clearly contageous. You made tea and biscuits come out of my nose you little tinker.
The world's most powerful man? Bwahahahahaha. And there was me thinking he'd 'only' destroyed the UK economy but now you want to fit him up for wrecking the US one too.
Too funny.
Complain about this comment
212
After another two long, hard years in the UK, under the policy of taking money off people who have earned it and giving it to people who have earned nothing, I think you'll find its the Labour party that will be well and truly dead.
Complain about this comment
225:
If I could advise President Obama I'd tell him to steer well clear of the loser that is Gordon Brown.
Don't worry. I know you're on a wind up. Let's get back to some serious political debate.
Complain about this comment
#200 Jonathan,
No - I said Cameron has appreciated the need to be more representative, and has reduced the number of Old Etonians in his top team. There are still representation problems in his wider shadow Ministerial team, which he is also making a massive attempt to address. I don't think 2 Old Etonians in the top team is an issue - I think a third of shadow ministers being Old Etonians probably is.
I wasn't even making the toff argument, and you are hiding the issues below that (btw I think the potential perception of toffery is a something Cameron himself has recognised and is trying to change by making his team more representative)
Q: Would you say it was a problem if Labour recruited a third of their Ministerial team from Kirkaldy High School?
Complain about this comment
Downing Street insiders are hoping that, with Mr Brown's huge experience of ministerial office, he can become something of a mentor to the relatively inexperienced "leader of the free world".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk_politics/7708656.stm
Even if Barack did need "mentoring", which I find hard to believe, at least Gordon can't do much more damage.....I'm sure the US is pretty near the bottom of the pan already.
Complain about this comment
fom @ 226:
I think The Prescott programme showed his wife in a really good light but exposed him as an out of date class warrior with a massive chip on his shoulder.
Complain about this comment
226 FOM
Very well said.
Complain about this comment
You're discounting the private sector and consumer excess, and the real success that's emerging in education. If you followed up some of the links in my first post you'd take a different view.
Complain about this comment
The latest on Glenrothes:
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/SNP-on-a-high-.4660820.jp
Complain about this comment
I'm happy to see that the various Labour supporters who post here know how to keep their spirits up, by whistling and posting lots of messages of bravado. However they are doomed to failure, poor deluded fools.
I suspect if Obama, and more importantly his advisors, have got any sense they'll keep El Gordo at arm's length. He is associated with the doomed adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, and can bring nothing of value to the table.
Plus his solution to the financial crisis is not accepted universlly, and certainly not within the US.
In fact, El Gordo will find himself in limbo to a certain extent, and quite right too.
Complain about this comment
The only way they could manipulate it to suggesting it was getting better was to base it on the number of GCSEs passed (not jobs done, not income etc).
Great. In order to facilitate hiding two million from the dole queue by coercing them to get loans for their essentially worthless degree certificates we need to supply them with enough GCSE's to justify their admission.
No problem. Download this from the internet and submit it to your teacher. It's worth an 'A' in your continual assessment. No wonder Gordon wants everybody to have computers. The only ones not getting straight 'A's are the ones unable to download and print off the pat answers.
And this is wheeled out as evidence of 'social mobility'.
In ten years they really have destroyed everything they've touched haven't they. I mean, if I'd sat down and actively tried to wreck a country I couldn't have dome a more thorough job. Kudos to the Labour destroyers who not only bankrupt the UK (twice in a generation) but also totally annihilated our state education system.
The fruits of their destruction only now spilling onto the employment market clutching expensively acquired pieces of toilet paper from third-rate 'universities' and wondering how our annihilated economy is going to supply them with a job that will pay off their student loan and allow them to eat and save for a mortgage. Join the club mate.
And Barak Obama is going to be on the hot-line asking Brown on tips for how to run a country? Bwahahahahaha.
Complain about this comment
210 Charles_E_Hardwidge wrote:
"She (Blears) is correct to stand up for something better and acknowledge people from less "approved" backgrounds. It emphasises real issues and real people, and leaves fear and greed out in the cold.
The right wing love to throw spaghetti and drag people into a fight, but Labour "get" that the secret of success is *self* improvement. The real enemy isn't "out there" but inside yourself."
What on earth does an "approved" background mean?
Most teachers and employers I know don't give a stuffed olive about "background", just an ability to get focused and apply to a task.
Self-improvement has always been the key to success. That has nothing to do with any political party.
Every country and culture seems to have some type of stratification. Mostly, in a "free world" it seems to come down to wealth, or political clout, which is a shame. But, when you erode the recognition of the value of "learning/ knowledge/ erudition" or genuine technical abilities, that's where you get.
I don't dislike Blair and Brown because of their backgrounds or politics. Just because they wasted huge amounts of tax money with so little return.
Education is the key to success. And the fundamental is teaching at the youngest level. No child should just have been left to "slip through the net" and be allowed to grow into an illiterate, innumerate member of a secondary school.
Trying to socially engineer the country, by targeting 50p/c of youngsters moving on to university is not a sensible approach.
Possessing a degree is not a symbol of social/commercial usefulness. 50 p/c of jobs do not require degrees.
But everyone needs to be helped to read, write and have a minimal understanding of mathematics.
Check out our "success" over a decade.
Complain about this comment
235 Sici
You are right, she comes across truly charming, against all odds, the poor woman endures as her misguided, bitter husband continues to tilt at windmills.
Prescott is Bounderby personified.
Complain about this comment
There don't seem to be any legs on this thread. It's over now, we know who won, we know you cannot compare US democrats to Labour or Conservative with any expectation of accuracy, and we know that change is in the air.
Its too late for El Gordo to change. He's been tied up in government activities here for 1 years, and cannot suddenly shrug all the baggage off for well documentd reasons.
He's just marking time until the next election here, which he's destined to lose. Can't wait.
Complain about this comment
#238 sicilian
Just read the news on Glenrothes. Thanks for that.
I'll be praying very hard for an SNP victory tonight.
Complain about this comment
You're discounting the private sector
Well we can hardly congratulate the state for the successes of private education can we? The only input the state has is to be such a woeful supplier that anybody with any money runs off to the private sector. and the real success that's emerging in education.
and consumer excess,
Oh steady on. You're waaaaay off message. It's all the banks and the yanks fault. You can't go blaming the consumers for believing all that 'No more boom and bust' moonshine. That's like admitting to the voters that all the time you were telling them you were prudently managing the economy and that GDP was increasing as a result of your prudent management you were, in private, shaking your head at the insanity of remortgaging your hose for a new car and a family holiday in the Indian Ocean. Say it ain't so? You're blaming the consumers for believing the government?
and the real success that's emerging in education.
What? You're having a laugh aren't you? Exams that are passed with an 'A' piecemeal after several iterations of 'continual assessment'. A success? In the same sense that Gordon Browns economic mismanagement is a 'success'. It's not a failure. It's not a complete and utter catastrophe. It's just deferred success.
Never mind Gordon, you've totally shafted the economy this time. Take it home and have another go.
Educational successes? Oh my aching sides.
Complain about this comment
#228 Balhamu
In part the current decline in house prices might support your jaundiced view of things, but when the rebound, as they will, eventually, this will come up again.
The threshold at which DEATH duties are paid, and that's what they are, is woefully inadequate, even with Darkling's forced increase in the threshold last year.
There is also the factor of iniquity in this issue.
We all need some where to live and either buy our own home or rent from soebody else. Should the buyer's be penalised for providing their own solution out of taxed income?
The majority of the people in this country are in work, or have been in work (now retired) or will be in work in the future. Our PAYE system causes us to pay tax on our earnings. If we have sufficient money left over we can save it, and the income earned is taxed. Anything we buy with our money is taxed at the point of sale.
So, according to Labour philosphy, when we die all the previously taxed wealth that we might have created should be taxed one more time, with this tax being paid by our children. And so it goes on.
There is becoming a huge financial benefit in not dying, since if you don't die you don't pay inheritance tax. This will be a growth industry in future, and I'm not showing anyone my business model, so I will get extermely rich.
Complain about this comment
Comparing the Republicans with British Conservatives and the Democrats(Obama in particular) with a resurrected Old Labour is a joke.
If you listen to what Obama has said throughout his campaign it it clear the Democrats in UK terms are probably still slightly right of the centre ground.
Since this is where Cameron is seeking to sit in British politics I see the Obama success as an encouragement and not a dead nell for the British Conservative party.
Complain about this comment
fairlyopenmind, you really need to follow up the links I've given you in my comments on education and Hazel Blears discussing corrosion, instead of mouthing off. All you're doing is arguing and being negative, and I'm not going to respond to that. Life is too short, okay?
Complain about this comment
fom @ 226
lack of delivery in education
I totally agree with you that this is the sine non qua. If we want to foster a fairer and more prosperous society - really want to, I mean, rather than pay lip service to the idea - then we have to grasp the nettle on educating children.
- teaching to be a high paid top profession
- flexible, challenging curriculum
- suitable mix of academic and vocational
- no political interference in the classroom
- best of traditional and modern methods
- streaming where appropriate
- meaningful gold standard exams
- one hundred per cent state sector
There's plenty of times, on this blog, where I post things which make it appear as if I know my own mind whereas, in point of fact, I don't ... on this, however, I just know that I'm right.
And on this most crucial of areas, I'm a little disappointed with Labour, to be honest, because I think they could have done more than they have. As regards the Tories, did I mention lip service merchants? - ah yes, I did. Good, because that's what they are.
Complain about this comment
Nick, we need a new thread please.
I just found a news item on the UK politics page about entertaining your pets. I take these things seriously.
I read my cat some of the postings from this thread, particularly from you know who. He didn't consider this to be entertaining, and is now threatening to get a court order barring me from repeating this action in the future.
I also noted on the business section a nice little Orwellian touch. It seems the largest steel production company in the world is suffering from the economic downturn, but seeks to put a positive spin on things. So it announces a doubling of the production cuts that are currently in place.
Don't you just love it? Doubling something sounds much more positive than cutting something, even if the effect is the same. Allie and Petie would be proud of whoever is handling their PR. However, since the owner of the company is that nice Mr Mittal, that may just be a moot point, if you get my drift.
Complain about this comment
and the real success that's emerging in education.
Errrr - would that be the fiasco re the SATS marking? I believe the government farmed this particular job out to an american company who made an absolute pig's ear out of the whole thing.
Complain about this comment
when we die all the previously taxed wealth that we might have created should be taxed one more time, with this tax being paid by our children.
That's true in many countries. In many countries it is the children and benificiaries who are taxed. In the UK however it is quite literally the corpse who is taxed. We tax our dead. Our government are grave robbers.
Complain about this comment
All you're doing is arguing and being negative, and I'm not going to respond to that. Life is too short, okay?
It is true in these dark days of Labour incompetence that we should try to look on the bright side of life. A little Monty Python doesn't go amiss as they erect the cross and drive nails into the UK economy's wrists. Who knows, at some point in the future, but certainly further than three days from now, the UK economy may roll back the stone from its tomb and emerge blinking into the sunlight.
But for the moment it remains (Monty Python reference again) like the Norwegian Blue. Dead but nailed to its perch. Its neck wrung by Gordon Brown and his loyal band of economic incompetents.
Complain about this comment
I just know that I'm right.
In the same sense Gordon Brown just knows he's right no doubt. Right up until the economy explodes in his face.
Then suddenly he's looking for people to blame. How his pure vision of endless prosperity for all financed by ever-increasing borrowing failed not because it was a stupid idea that couldn't possibly work. No. We all let him down. The Americans. The banks. The FSA. The BoE. The consumers. We all let Gordon Brown down.
Fact is that you have completely the wrong end of the stick. There should be the absolute minimum of state supplied education. Privatise the state schools. Get rid of all these teachers who are so cynical that they haven't resigned en masse over the systematic destruction of standards.
Sure, give out vouchers for use in privately owned schools. Sure, all school expenses to be pay-roll deducatable but absolutely NO to state interference in schools.
The problem ain't private schools. The problem is the politicisation and destruction of standards in the state schools. As any fule kno.
Complain about this comment
U @ 208
And it is all Gordon Brown's fault. He was the guy in charge of the money. He was the guy responsible for regulating the banks.
Look, I think U are just plain wrong to say that it's Brown's fault. The main problem is a credit bubble caused by excesses and fraud in the private sector (USA and UK) - it's a failure of unrestrained free market capitalism. The way that he's managed our public finances, you can debate, but that's on the margins. Sorry but that's the way it is.
However I don't want to keep spinning around like a rat on a wheel with this, so I've come up with a way of ending it. It's a wizard wheeze and I'm quite proud of it.
Are U ready? - okay, so we introduce a distinction between blame and responsibility !! - see how that sets us free?
Yes it does because now we can agree that, although Brown is not to blame (because that would be the likes of Greenspan, the City, Wall Street, feckless people generally) he is, for sure responsible.
He's responsible because it's happened on his watch. Chancellor (and in many ways the domestic PM) for 10 years, then actual PM since then. If that's not responsible, what is, right?
Think of it like with the Jonathan Ross affair that we were all diverted by recently. What happened was Wossy's fault, wasn't it? But it was the R2 Controller who was deemed to be responsible.
So let's say (in our little analogy) that Jonathan is the City and Wall Street - he was to blame for the debacle and paid with a suspension without pay - so that's like all the bankers getting no bonuses for a while, yes?
And the R2 boss is like Gordon. She paid with her job - as GB will do at the next election, provided that the public sees things in this way.
Yes, I like that. I feel I've hit the nail on the head.
Complain about this comment
250. At 11:40am on 05 Nov 2008, herb_igone_ex_tuga wrote:
Nick, we need a new thread please.
I just found a news item on the UK politics page about entertaining your pets. I take these things seriously.
I read my cat some of the postings from this thread, particularly from you know who. He didn't consider this to be entertaining, and is now threatening to get a court order barring me from repeating this action in the future.
----------------------------------------------
Even that newt Livingstone was more honest, he at least said he wanted to let London's pigeons starve to death.
The cats are very nervous, they know Harman will get hold of the toms and remove their manhood, but there is worse to come. The chubby Garfields and Scooby cats will be put on diets and made to run around the block. Plans are already in force to give pet owners who overfeed their animals an asbo, whilst the beasties will be sent to camps where they will join obese children who are already in care. And who is Big Brother/Sister? Bloggers are invited to guess!
Complain about this comment
@ 252
We tax our dead
Which, as taxes go, is a great idea. You don't notice it when you're dead, do you?
No tax is popular, of course, but death duty is one of the better ones. It's paid only by the better off and in any case (as U points out) they've passed from this veil of tears to a better place.
If taxes need to go up, I'd say that this one should be a prime candidate.
Complain about this comment
#227 the_real_truth,
"The only way they could manipulate it to suggesting it was getting better was to base it on number of GCSEs passed (not jobs done, income etc)"
Labour came to power in 1997. Academic experts (e.g. Leon Feinstein) highlight the importance of early years and primary education of determining future educational performance and prospects for upward social mobility. No-one experiencing Labour's reforms in these areas are currently in the job market.
Those born since Labour came to power are now 11 years old.
Those aged 5 (and starting the first year of school) when Labour came to power are 16 now and have just completed their GCSEs.
Those aged 11 (and beginning secondary school) are now 22 and have just finished university (if indeed they went).
Those aged 16 (and educated up to GCSE level entirely by the Conservatives) are now aged 27.
Experts tend to look at people some way into their working lives to analyse social mobility (e.g. at least at age 30).
It would seem rather unfair to look at the jobs and income of those aged 30 now, who were educated under the Conservatives, and draw conclusions about Labours' social mobility policies. Why should Labour claim the credit for changes in social mobility due to Conservative policies 1979-1997 - it seems unfair on the Tories to do that.
The only things that can be looked at the moment e.g. the links between family background and academic performance and projected social mobility based on changes in academic performance at age 16. However, this provides a partial picture, and we will have to wait until at least 2022 to get a full picture of the social mobility experienced by the "Blair generation" of school children, and the long-run effectiveness of the policies.
Maybe Labour over-egged things in the media (or, alternatively, the media don't like complex stories and preferred to focus on the very tentative conclusions the document drew)
Complain about this comment
Yes it does because now we can agree that, although Brown is not to blame (because that would be the likes of Greenspan, the City, Wall Street, feckless people generally) he is, for sure responsible.
Naaah. In the UK, he's to blame. He's the one who doubled national debt. He's the one who handed out one million jobs and the massive pay that goes with them and failed to take into account what that would do to the affordability of available housing. Remember, only the year before these people would have been taking home their true market worth. Unemployment benefit.
He's the one that rigged the 'independent' BoE's remit to target only inflation. Oh, and not house price inflation. So your 'basket of goods' including SD cards for your digital camera goes up from 5,000 a year to 5,100. Way-hey. Only 2% inflation.
Meanwhile your house went up from 150,000 to 170,000 last year. Ignore that. Use this inflation here. Yes, this very low number. Use that. Target that. And it's not like this house price inflation and concomitant consumer bubble were an unheard of phenomenon. It had happened only a decade prior. In the UK. It was the cause of the previous recession. A recession he specifically vowed to avoid in his 1997 manifesto.
Gordon Brown is 100% culpable, responsible and to blame for the UK's recession. He was uniquely placed to avoid it. He had control of all the levers. He had access to all the numbers and all the information. He had recent historical precedent for what was happening and unless he's a complete jellyfish he had to know what would be the consequences.
Why anybody would seek to absolve him I do not know.
Complain about this comment
#257 sagamix
We tax our dead
Which, as taxes go, is a great idea. You don't notice it when you're dead, do you?
No tax is popular, of course, but death duty is one of the better ones. It's paid only by the better off and in any case (as U points out) they've passed from this veil of tears to a better place.
If taxes need to go up, I'd say that this one should be a prime candidate.
..........that's all very well as long as our kids don't end up being saddled with it all.
Complain about this comment
255 Saga
Good Afternoon,
Nice analogy, The real problem is of course is Browns interpretation of events. He has claimed that he was responsible for the last 10 years of economic growth. (Clearly he wasn't) so for people to think otherwise, is his fault.
Sorry Gordon you can't have your cake and eat it (unless of course you have two cakes).
Complain about this comment
Which, as taxes go, is a great idea. You don't notice it when you're dead, do you?
For some reason grave-robbing and looting of corpses is frowned upon in our society. But if you think it's a good idea then that's your choice.
Others will draw their own conclusions.
Complain about this comment
#257 Sagamix
House prices are the key here, along with any prudent savings for old age that we may have made, such as pensions.
When the surviving spouse dies (because hsubands and wives can leave to each other tax free) the value of the estate is levied on that person. The family home and any savings are added together and, if they exceed the threshold, tax is charged.
Now even with reducing house prices in the South East, and other affluent areas, the value of the house still exceeds the threshold in a high proportion of cases. So they're liable for tax even before any savings might be added.
I'm just making sure we've got your prejudices lined up properly. You are arguing that the threshold should be lowered? or that the rate of tax should be increased? or some mixture of both?
What you're not supporting is the fact that this is iniquitous, and the threshold should be raised to 1mn quids (Tory policy), thus taking the majority of people in this country out of the whole process. Am I right?
Complain about this comment
#254 U9461192
Privatising all schools - a bold option, and a very interesting one.
It is what the Government have been attempting to do in their Academy programme I think. Giving schools the freedom to innovate.
However, it operates within a tightly regulated framework of admissions control. International evidence (and UK evidence) suggests that where admissions are not regulated, school managers see the potential in "improving" their results by screening out low-ability kids, or improving their appeal to middle-class families by getting rid of the proles (who don't speak proper or may be from ethnic minorities). The 'fees' that schools charge parents to attend their schools is fixed by the Government.
As a headteacher, your goal is to increase demand for your school in the free-market (and even in the current system). The main way to do this is to improve academic results e.g. the % achieving A-grades at GCSE. There are 2 key mechanisms for this - you can either undertake difficult reforms within the school (e.g. get rid of poor teachers, improve the school environment etc), or you can just try and improve the quality of your intake through devising admissions criteria that restrict entry among the least able, and through strict and inconsistently applied disciplinary measures to get rid of those of low ability who slip through your admissions net (I know my school liked this latter mechanism a lot). The latter is far easier, and left to their own devices schools will do this (indeed, as I have said, getting rid of the proles will enhance the schools appeal to the middle-classes even more). This is why the Admissions Code exists - it prevents this perverse incentive. A good school system would operate to give incentives to real improvement - not the pretence of real improvement by manipulating school intakes.
Also, do you think there should be variable admissions fees? And should everyone be given a voucher - this will be massively expensive for the state as it would require massive additional spending to provide vouchers to those who already choose the private sector (not necessarily undesirable - though regressive - just that it needs to be paid for)? And what happens when unpopular schools go bust?
Complain about this comment
#252, #257 U and saga,
We don't tax our dead. We tax those who inherit large sums of money.
We tax a small proportion of the unearned inheritances of the relatives of the 10% most wealthy people who die.
For example, someone who owns 500,000 pounds worth of assets can be considered wealthy (I hope we can agree on that).
Their estate will have to pay 40% inheritance tax on the amount above the 312,000 pound allowance (i.e. 40% of 188,000 = £75,000).
The total tax paid on the 500,000 estate is 75/500=15%, and leaves 415,000 of unearned wealth to be enjoyed by the (likely to be already wealthy) inheritors.
Another argument for inheritance tax would be that most of the middle-classes wealth comes from housing assets.
Now, most people who have a housing assets have seen massive capital gains from it without doing a massive amount of work, other than doing a bit of NIMBYism to prevent new houses being built.
We do not charge capital gains tax on housing (one of the reasons for a market prone to crazy swings - investors are drawn to invest in housing due to its favourable tax status).
So, say I bought a house in 1970, and have seen its value treble (in real terms) since then from 160,000 pounds when I bought it, to 500,000 now. I have enjoyed a capital gain of 340,000. Not because of my hard work (well - I was part of the effort to stop those flats being built down the road), but because the planning system does not free up enough land to build new houses on.
My inheritors have to pay 75,000 pounds inheritance tax on the house (47% of the unearned capital gain I have seen; my inheritors enjoy 53% of this unearned capital gain)
Complain about this comment
U @ 254
Fact is that you have completely the wrong end of the stick. There should be the absolute minimum of state supplied education. Privatise the state schools. Get rid of all these teachers who are so cynical that they haven't resigned en masse over the systematic destruction of standards.
Teaching needs to be upgraded, no question. I'd even agree that to do that is more important than whether schools are private or state.
Nevertheless, as regards sticks and which side of them I tend to get a hold of, I am convinced that the other way is better - so I wouldn't privatise state schools, I'd get rid of private ones. Or I'd do something sneaky like make university entrance conditional on having A levels, where only state schools can offer A levels.
Reason I'd do all that (which I recognise is an infringment of people's right to spend their own money to the benefit of their own children) is because I think it's the only way to foster true equality of opportunity. If everything is private, or the private option remains, then you will always have a situation of "money talks" - that's wrong but acceptable for most things in life (health care, for example) but it's wrong and unacceptable for something as crucial to people's life prospects as the quality of their education.
Complain about this comment
@ 262
For some reason grave-robbing and looting of corpses is frowned upon in our society. But if you think it's a good idea then that's your choice.
Yes, Inheritance Tax is a particularly emotive subject. I know that but I'm not quite sure why.
After all, it's the overall tax burden that counts, isn't it? And this particular tax seems to me to be ...
- easy to understand (transparent)
- progressive (linked to wealth)
- relatively painless (levied on the dead)
So if, say, tax has to go up because government borrowing is too high, then I'd
rather death duties were increased and not(for example) VAT ... or, god forbid, more of those "stealth taxes" that we all hate so much.
Complain about this comment
#263 herb
Q/ Do you think that people have a right to enjoy large capital gains from increases on house prices driven by planning restrictions?
Q/ If yes, why? How does this tax impact on incentives to work and save?
Q/ Economic theory would suggest inheritance tax to be a very efficient way of raising revenue, as in general it has very limited impacts on people's behaviour (unlike, arguably, income tax does). Given that Government will always need to raise some revenue, shouldn't inheritance tax be part of the mix rather than more income tax? Or would you prefer a less efficient tax structure, so long as it benefits the most wealthy?
Complain about this comment
herb @ 263
You are arguing that the threshold should be lowered? or that the rate of tax should be increased? or some mixture of both?
Hello herb, thanks for the interest.
No, I'm not saying either of those things really. Raising IT (either via lower threshold or higher rate) isn't a good thing in itself - I'm just of the view that, as taxes go, this is not such a bad one (as per #267) and therefore if there's a need for taxes to go up - to prune back government borrowing, say - then I'd be in favour of looking seriously at this one.
Complain about this comment
#265 balhamu
For example, someone who owns 500,000 pounds worth of assets can be considered wealthy (I hope we can agree on that).
I would consider myself wealthy if I had that sort of money. However, through no fault of my own I do not have a pension to fall back on any more, so someone in my position would have to sell their house to finance them and their spouse through their old age.
£500,000 sounds a lot, but it doesn't seem so much when people are living longer and could well be retired for twenty years at least. They would also have to buy somewhere else out of those funds in which to live in the meantime. Little wonder that so many people are leaving Britain to live more cheaply elsewhere.
Complain about this comment
We don't tax our dead. We tax those who inherit large sums of money.
No. We tax the dead.
In Ireland they tax the living. I can't remember the numbers (could look them up) but this illustrates the point:
In Ireland, when you die, they dig out your will - 'Of my one million pounds I leave 200,000 each to my four sons, 100,000 to my girlfriend and 50,000 each to the butcher and the Post Office clerk'.
So far, so good.
In the UK the HMRC ram-raids the solicitors office (or undertakers), grabs their 40% and disappears. They rob the dead guy.
In Ireland your kids have a tax-free allowance of (say) 100,000 each so they get taxed on the other 100,000. Your girlfriend has a tax-free aloowance of (say) 50,000 etc and the butcher has a tax-free allowance of (say) 20,000 as a non-relative.
See? Taxing the living as opposed to taxing the dead.
In the UK we tax the dead. HMRC are no better than grave-robbers. It wouldn't be so bad if it was Angelina Jolie rummaging around in your coffin, at least it'd be something to look forward to. Kind of. But some soulless ghoul acting for the disingenuous Brown just so he can squander it along with all the other thousands of billions just sticks in the craw.
Complain about this comment
As a headteacher, your goal is to increase demand for your school in the free-market (and even in the current system). The main way to do this is to improve academic results e.g. the % achieving A-grades at GCSE. There are 2 key mechanisms for this
I think there's at least a third and fourth way of achieving that. Possibly a fifth.
Thirdly you can discourage study of all 'difficult' subjects. So out go physics and in comes 'drama'. That'll increase the number of 'A's. No right answer = all answers are equally right.
Fourthly you can cherry-pick your examining board so out go (say) Nuffield (they used to do the 'tricky' physics 'O' level if I remember rightly) and in comes the Roger Melly comedy board of Drama qualifications.
Fifthly you put pressure on your teachers to assess their pupils even less rigorously. Not that teachers aren't already sufficiently motivated to give any old piece of garbage a good mark. After all, their results affect their annual appraisal.
And this is why more and more private schools are going to the International Bacchalaureate. Because there is independent marking. And international standards. And real learning taking place.
Laughably, because increasingly independent schools no longer sit GCSEs this is interpreted by government stats as independent schools 'failing'. Probably goes some way to explain their bogus claims for increased 'social mobility' too.
They really are the most awful UK government since the last Labour one. Aren't they?
Complain about this comment
U and The Numbers @ 259
He's the one who doubled national debt.
But kept it under control as a percentage of GDP - the measurement of affordability.
He's the one who handed out one million jobs and the massive pay that goes with them
That's pub talk.
and failed to take into account what that would do to the affordability of available housing.
We don't have a planned economy, I'm afraid. Maybe one day.
He's the one that rigged the 'independent' BoE's remit to target only inflation. Oh, and not house price inflation
Well, asset inflation is not like your can of beans is it? Also, if U do cost of mortgage, that's problematical because, if U then say hike rates to bring down inflation, you've gone and put up one of its core components. Maybe some sort of rent estimate should be there but, U know, it's not that straightforward. To say he "rigged it" is off beam.
only the year before these people would have been taking home their true market worth. Unemployment benefit.
Let's put this mildly ... a little harsh?
A recession he specifically vowed to avoid in his 1997 manifesto.
Did he really? And U believed him? Do U make a habit of believing every word in political manifestos?
Gordon Brown is 100% to blame for the UK's recession.
No - 20 per cent like I said before.
Phew, need a little lie down now. I do wish U would agree with me when I give U an open goal - U are just rude sometimes, U know that? ...
Complain about this comment
Or I'd do something sneaky like make university entrance conditional on having A levels, where only state schools can offer A levels.
Ho ho ho. You mean like the whole 'ID cards are purely voluntary' moonshine as well.
Yeah. Sure. Voluntary. Unless you want a passport. Or a drivers licence. Or a bank account. Or to visit a doctor.
It's all part of the same slippery slope you see. Corral people into 'approved' places of learning. Teach them 'approved' topics from 'approved' viewpoints. Monitor them at every step for conformity. Turn out legions of same-thinking drones who'll unquestioningly accept their place in society, show their ID cards and be good little workers.
But don't you worry, there'll still be an 'elite' deciding who gets what job and who gets what pay. Perhaps you think in your brave new world it'll be you?
Don't count on it.
1984 is a warning not a 'How to...' manual.
Complain about this comment
#268 balhamu
Some of the most wealthy, to whom you refer in post 268, are none other than our own politicians! They won't raise any of their taxes, it's far easier to shaft the rest of us!
Complain about this comment
@ 271
In the UK we tax the dead. HMRC are no better than grave-robbers.
Yes, I'm happy to put it like that. Tax the dead - why not?
As regards HMRC being "grave robbers", well that's just falsely equating taxation with theft - you could equally well say that VAT on food is a state mugging, couldn't you?
Complain about this comment
#'254 shellingout
Interesting.
Do you consider someone who owns assets (including housing) worth 312,000 pounds wealthy, average or quite poor?
#271 U9461192
You are trying very hard to justify your view that inheritance tax is equivalent to grave robbery.
Who is worse-off because of the tax? Is it the dead person? (less money to take into the next life or something?) Or is it living people who actually inherit and spend the money?
Aside from that:
It appears that you do not necessarily disagree with an inheritance tax per se, and your argument would seem to have some strength (i.e. taxing individual inheritance rather than total estate - it may e.g. encourage people to split their estate up into smaller chunks at death to avoid tax).
However, it seems like it could have a number of loopholes that would need to be tightened to make it feasible.
I suspect that one of the reasons why you are so passionate about this shift, is that it could be combined with a massive decrease in the amount of inheritance tax each estate has to pay.
I would disagree that this is a sensible thing to do, because inheritance tax is one of the most efficient tax we have. Abolishing/significantly reducing this tax would make the tax system more distorting and so less efficient.
Conservatives often complain about how inefficient the tax system is (which is why a new Cameron government would immediately launch a tax review), except, it appears, when making it more inefficient would benefit their core vote in the wealthiest 10% of the population. Efficiency is good, but only when it leads to the poor paying more tax/or the rich monopolising the gains.
Complain about this comment
you could equally well say that VAT on food is a state mugging, couldn't you?
Too right. Although there is no VAT on raw ingredients. Yet.
Still they tax you if you have a meal while out of town. I mean - taxing food. Food for God's sake. Have they no shame?
What should we eat to avoid tax? Dust? No calories and no tax.
Complain about this comment
#272 U
You are quite right about the other ways in which schools (in the public and private sectors) go about manipulating measures of their performance to do well in the marketplace.
A good education system would ensure that schools had incentives to focus only on educational quality at the expense of these other ways of "improving" measured quality.
It's not clear to me why a private market would have those incentives naturally, without Government regulation (e.g. information provision, regulation of exam board quality, admissions regulation or at the very least implementing performance measures that parents understand and use that cannot be affected by 'skimming the cream').
And it is not clear to me that Government has no role in dictating content of syllabuses (e.g. who implemented the National Curriculum?). Or that children should be forced to study "harder" subjects that they have no inclination for to an advanced level.
I am interested in your answers to my questions at the end of #264. You've made your political points now, what about the practical implications of the educational policies you suggest are followed?
Complain about this comment
#277 balhamu
£312,000 is not a huge sum of money these days. A lot of people own houses worth £250,000 and above and it has nothing to do with rejecting planning permissions for other developments.
I bought my first house in 1975 for which I paid the princely sum of £10,000 - a fortune then to someone on a very average salary. I had to save up a deposit of 10% over 2 years with the Woolwich before they'd even let me through the door to ask for a mortgage.
Ever since then, my spouse and myself have bought run down houses, and lived in them while we renovated the properties ouselves. We didn't employ builders unless we had to - we couldn't afford it. We are not high flying developers, just ordinary people trying to better ourselves. We've worked hard. We paid VAT on all the materials we bought to do the work in the firs place. We then got re-assessed for Council Tax. Why should we be taxed again?
Complain about this comment
#278 U
Ok. Tax is always theft right?
So, how do we pay for police? How do we pay for defence? How do we pay for the courts system? How do we pay for roads, new railway lines Etc.
I take it you would rather a system where the unemployed and sick are left to beg on the streets and fend for themselves, so we need no benefits.
Schools, as you've already said, should be privatised.
Healthcare should be privatised.
Is this no-tax vision your utopia. No Government. No public services (or publicly financed service). Education and Health for the rich only. Begging for the rest.
I'm just trying to understand your view.
Complain about this comment
@ 274
It's all part of the same slippery slope you see. Corral people into 'approved' places of learning. Teach them 'approved' topics from 'approved' viewpoints. Monitor them at every step for conformity. Turn out legions of same-thinking drones who'll unquestioningly accept their place in society, show their ID cards and be good little workers.
Nope, you've completely lost it now, haven't you? Next thing is you'll be weighing in with the good old super spurious nineteen eighty four reference. Probably say it's meant to be a warning not an instr ...
1984 is a warning not a 'How to...' manual.
Argh !! ... and I thought you might be better than that. Ah well.
they tax you if you have a meal while out of town. I mean - taxing food. Food for God's sake. Have they no shame?
Okay, I think I get the picture - not a great fan of taxation.
Complain about this comment
#280 shellingout
"312,000 pounds is not a huge sum of money these days"
Depends who you compare yourself with. To the super-rich City folk and Russian oligarchs that inhabit London it is but loose change. To the majority of people it is a hell of a lot of money.
The minimum wage in this country is 5.73 per hour or around 12,000 per year based on a 40 hour week. Someone on the minimum wage would have to work for 26 years and spend no money at all to have 312,000 pounds.
Median full-time earnings are 457 pounds/week or around 24,000 per year. Someone on median earnings would have to work for 13 years and spend no money at all to have 312,000 pounds.
The average house was worth 223,000 in 2007 (and there has been significant declines in house prices since then).
I think 312,000 pounds is a significant amount of wealth, which is borne out by the low %s of estates who pay inheritance tax.
re you've worked hard to improve the value of your house
That may be true, but I suspect most gains in the value of the house you have seen are due to macro factors (i.e. planning restriction and increases in housing demand) unrelated to the work you have put in. Increases in house prices are due to increases in the price of land with planning permission rather than increases in the value of the buildings themselves.
You say you paid 10,000 pounds for your house in 1975. In real terms (adjusting for inflation 1975 to 2008), this is about 58,000 (2008) pounds.
Assuming your house is now worth 250,000 (like 'a lot of people'). you have made a real capital gain of 192,000 pounds, and have experienced a real return of 6.5% on your initial investment.
You have to pay zero capital gains tax on this unearned wealth (in contrast to investments in other assets). Isn't inheritance tax a valid means of clawing these unearned gains back?
Besides, your children (if you have them) won't have to pay a penny of inheritance tax on that capital gain anyway as a house worth 250,000 pounds leaves you below the threshold in any case
Complain about this comment
shelling
What is rich? Tricky question obviously. I'd say that somebody who has a net worth of ten times the national average (counting all assets, including pension and equity in main residence) is rich. I can't say an exact figure because I don't know what the average is.
As regards the question of should you pay inheritance tax - you make a good case that you shouldn't but so can many others, I would have thought. The point is that, if you didn't pay it, then someone else would have to pay more tax in order to protect the public finances, wouldn't they?
This thing about being taxed twice is a bit of red herring in my view. After all, look at Capital Gains Tax - you buy an asset using already taxed income and, if you later sell that asset for a big profit, you are liable for CGT. There's nothing special about IT in this respect, it's just that the tax is crystallised on death.
Complain about this comment
I do believe he's gone.
Complain about this comment
#281 balhamu
If our Road Tax payments actually went on bettering the roads, I think complaints would be fewer. Likewise, if my car got broken into and I called the police, it would be nice if a policeman/woman came round to see me within, say, 4 days of my reporting the incident. I had to wait almost 3 weeks.
People hear the PM saying that millions of pounds is going into certain areas, but most of us see no actual benefit. We would just like to know where all our taxes are going - and most of us want an honest answer, and not the answer the PM thinks we all want to hear. Not rocket science really.
Complain about this comment
U7765765 whatever.
So tell us Wise One.
What will/won't/should not be taxed when your Political And Economic Gurus, Osbourne and Chamelian get elected.
Please enlight the poor fools such as myself, Balhamu etc
Complain about this comment
#286 shellingout
And that's a fair political view to have. Maybe a better system could be:
1. Every single tax should be hypothecated back into the sector it is taken from, or hypothecated for a certain purpose (e.g. cigarette taxes on dealing with public health costs from smoking, road tax on filling potholes and building new roads, allocating e.g. defence income tax, police income tax and so on)
2. Services that Government provides should be charged for wherever possible to ensure those who gain pay for it (e.g. why should someone without children pay school fees, why should someone who has looked after their health pay for obese people to receive health treatment)
3. Tax should be levied as a flat charge, to reflect ones fair share of the services which you pay for. Redistribution should have no role as it breaks the link between what you pay and what you get out. This (along with the efficiency of flat-rate taxation) was the motivation behind Thatcher's attempt to introduce a poll tax in 1989 as the system for local taxation.
4. Government should scrap benefits and stimulate private insurance e.g. against risks of sickness and unemployment
Complain about this comment
#283 balhamu
Someone on the minimum wage would have to work for 26 years and spend no money at all to have 312,000 pounds.
....try 33 years balhamu and it's nowhere near £312,000, although we had to spend money during that period to live. This money will have to keep us in our retirement but the way prices are going, I think we might have to re-think the figures again. We managed to have two children in between all this and it would be nice if we could leave them a couple of hundred when we peg out, at least.
Complain about this comment
#284 sagamix
I realise we all have to pay taxes, but when I see our politicians living such affluent lives at our expense, it really sticks in the craw!
Complain about this comment
287:
For the last time Osborne!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
#268 Balhamu and
#269 sagamix
you're both a bit cavalier with our money.
Balhamu, in answer to your questions:
1 It's a bit subjective. Planning restrictions aren't the onl y reason property prices went up. it partly refletcs the growing wealth of the country. Also, in any case, we don not have enough land to support new houses, new roads, other infrastructure and support growing our own food - the current crisis will tell you that's where we need to be heading. However, taking all that into account, YES, emphatically, YES.
2. Since working and saving already gets taxed I'm not sure what you're looking for here. If I paid less tax I might work harder and save more. As it is I pay tax on what I earn and on what I spend. Breathing currently is undertaxed, and you should report this immediately to Darling, so he can scoop up some money.
3. Whose economic theory? Certainly not mine, nor the tory party's. To raise it people have to die, not a pleasant way of promoting the whole thing. If the government gains when you die, you have to query the values of the NHS, who would materially benefit from your death. I'm not trying to cast aspersions on the doctors and nurses, merely following the logic of your line of thought. You also have to think ahead, taking the lessons from the past to support your thought process. Accumulated and inherited wealth has been the bedrock of the growth of civilisation, and has been the powerhouse of the developed world.
As you can guess, I am steadfastly opposed to this as a matter of principle, and also to the whole issue of saying I'd rather tax that than this. Let's face it we are reaching a point when this will become academic - we wont have any jobs, any savings, any income, so the tax take will go right down.
So, avoid dying is all I'm saying.
Complain about this comment
I'm sure G Brown meant to say,
''THIS IS NO TIME FOR THE INVOICE'',
(referring to the financial problems)
except that he just read his notes wrong, then realised that it had a ring to it and decided not to correct himself.
Ah well such is history made.
Complain about this comment
What will/won't/should not be taxed when your Political And Economic Gurus, Osbourne and Chamelian get elected.
We're not electing Cameron and Osbourne. We're electing 'Not Gordon'. It's like 1997. Only in reverse.
These Labour idiots have to be annihilated. Otherwise their reign of idiocy will perpetuate.
It's up to the folk of Glenrothes to drive the message home. Again. Any sign of weakness on the part of the UK electorate now will be misinterpreted by Brown that he's somehow over the worst. If Glenrothes breaks ranks and votes Labour then the disaster could get even worse.
He may feel emboldened to go to the country and that would never do. He has to be paralysed with fear and sit it out to the bitter end. There are still some in the UK for whom the penny hasn't dropped. They still think that this economic disaster is the Americans fault. Because Gordon told them so and the BBC daren't/doesn't want to challenge his tirade of mis-truths.
Only the coming two years of utter economic melt-down will drive home who was in power when all the idiocies were being perpetrated. Gordon Brown. Labour.
If he is ousted now then the leering apologists for this direst of governments will, in years to come, be blaming this destructive recession on the Tories. And the weak-minded will believe them.
Nope. It will be hell now for years. The best we can hope for is that the party that brought us here is fully identified with this disaster and rewarded, as were the Whigs and the Liberals, with eternal electoral damnation.
Amen.
Complain about this comment
#289 shellingout
So we agree then - 312,000 is a hell of a lot of money.
Therefore, the only estates on which inheritance tax are charged are those of the really wealthy.
And the good news for you (I'll leave aside whether it is right that your children should gain from the planning restrictions and increased housing demand that has given you so much housing wealth, but that is an aside) is that you are able to leave your children a couple of hundred thousand when you peg out - the Government will not touch it at all. Inheritance tax does not touch estates less than 312,000.
Phew.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
shelling @ 290
I realise we all have to pay taxes, but when I see our politicians living such affluent lives at our expense, it really sticks in the craw!
I also don't think it's right for politicians to live a life of luxury on the public purse. But having said that, there are a whole range of things that "stick in my craw" even more than that - to just pick 3 of them:
- Russian Oligarchs who have stolen (and I mean stolen) billions from people who had very little to start with.
- Obscene remuneration on Wall Street and in the City. Which is also theft but just done in a slightly more subtle way. Junior traders taking home ten times more than a heart surgeon? Give me a break.
- Public schools which propagate privilege down through the generations and poison the drinking water for everyone else.
All that sort of stuff, you know what I mean?
Complain about this comment
herb @ 292
So, avoid dying is all I'm saying.
I intend to.
Complain about this comment
It appears that Mandy has gone up in The World!
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2465625.0.Insiders_say_Mandelson_has_become_Browns_deputy.php
Complain about this comment
U @ 294
They still think that this economic disaster is the Americans fault.
Not entirely the Americans fault, at least in so far as the impact on the UK.
No, Gordon is to blame to some extent.
About 20 per cent to blame is where I think we left it, didn't we?
Yes, that's about right.
Complain about this comment
294# U
Talk about Pathetic Cop-out.
Just as I expected, typical Tory, nothing to offer but politics of fear. Pathetic
Complain about this comment
#190 MaxSceptic
Did you see today's PMQs?
Do you reckon David Cameron reads this blog!
Complain about this comment
295:
£312,000 is indeed a lot of money but in my neck of the woods it's the cost of an ordinary semi. It's not the preserve of the really wealthy at all. It's the assets of an ordinary , hard working pair of deceased parents who want to leave something for their children. For those who have families of 3+ which tends to be the less touched by wealth after the Government has taken it's cut it doesn't leave a great deal for the individual children. Although it's too late for me I would advise anyone on here to vote for the party that will abolish or raise inheritance tax substantially. The Government as a general rule tend to waste the revenue they receive anyway.
Complain about this comment
jonties @ 302,
As the wily politician would answer: "You may think so, but I couldn't possibly comment"
Sorry for the late reply - I've been out all day (No - not at Westminster - West Country ;-)
Complain about this comment
294#U
In case 301 remains moderated.
I thought your response was something of a cop-out.
You intend to vote for someone for whom you have nothing positive to say on tax changes.
your response seems to mainly focus on politics of fear. Some may say this is a typical Tory Trait.
There Mods, ok?
Complain about this comment
shelling @ 290
I realise we all have to pay taxes, but when I see our politicians living such affluent lives at our expense, it really sticks in the craw!
My previous reply was moderated so looks like I need to rephrase. Here goes ...
I agree that it's wrong if politicians are living a life of luxury on the public purse but there are many other things that "stick in my craw" a whole lot more. For example:
Oligarchs who have enriched themselves by billions at the expense of people who had very little to start with.
Junior traders in Investment Banks taking home ten times more than heart surgeons.
Public schools propagating privilege through the generations and poisoning the well for everyone else.
And all that sort of thing, you know what I mean?
Complain about this comment
303:
I meant of course 'lower inheritance tax'. Yet another stupid mistaka!
Complain about this comment
shelling @ 290 !!
I realise we all have to pay taxes, but when I see our politicians living such affluent lives at our expense, it really sticks in the craw!
Have twice tried to discuss this with you (at 297 and 306) but someone is just not having it. Getting censored, no idea why.
Catch you later sometime, cheers ...
Complain about this comment
#292 herb
Thanks for the response - good to get some discussion going on here, much better than the "Cameron good, Brown and ZaNuLabore bad, call an election" stuff that normally passes for intelligent comment here.
1. Planning restrictions aren't the only reason, no, but the major reason.
I would question why only those lucky enough to have parents who live in the south-east who own big homes should benefit from the scarcity of land (earned through their parents' political success in preventing new build going on) can share in this national wealth.
Also, urban land only covers 11.4% of all land in the (relatively dense) South-East (2003 Barker Report). This would suggest that there is some room for more houses in the South East.
I guess it's a big difference between left and right - the right say that people are only wealthy because they work hard and deserve all their wealth and so should be allowed to pass it onto their children with little barrier (and do not care about any negative social mobility impacts of this); the left say that wealth has a large element of luck to it (especially for most people who have only housing wealth) and that allowing this wealth to remain within wealthy families enhances inequalities and restricts social mobility.
2. My point is that inheritance tax is a tax on unearned income.
It has very little impact on people's behaviour (other than trying to take advantage of loopholes in the tax). It doesn't stop people working hard, nor distort investment patterns. There is little loss to economic efficiency from it. Compared to something like income tax, which (arguably) leaves people with less incentive to work, it is a good way of raising revenue for Government expenditure. If, for example, income tax was reduced and inheritance tax increased to raise an equivalent amount of revenue, GDP would increase.
3. This is classical tax theory which gives guidance on what the most efficient way to raise a given amount of government revenue would be (i.e. optimal tax structure from an economic efficiency perspective). See for example "The Structure and Reform of Direct Taxation" - James Meade (1978) and "Reforming the Tax System for the 21st Century" - James Mirrlees
The Conservatives agree with the economics behind classical tax theory (it's not controversial). Though maybe I was wrong about believing in inheritance taxation (this is where politics meets what's right with efficiency - politically the Conservatives would like to abolish inheritance taxes because their core support would gain hugely from it, and they have a philosophical belief that unlimited inheritance is a right).
Isn't it better to pay taxes that don't distort the economy when you die and won't need the money rather than levying distorting taxes and decrease efficiency and GDP during your life when you will need the money? And that's even without considering the equity case for inheritance tax - it's a pure efficiency argument which right-wingers normally lap up.
As you can guess, I am steadfastly opposed to this as a matter of principle, and also to the whole issue of saying I'd rather tax that than this. Let's face it we are reaching a point when this will become academic - we wont have any jobs, any savings, any income, so the tax take will go right down.
I know that, and you are entitled to your view.
But the Government has to raise some revenue (I think even the hardest neo-con would agree that there are some functions that Government should perform e.g. defence, policing, courts system - well maybe except our friend Mr U).
This revenue should be raised in the most efficient way. Taxes that do not distort the economy (e.g. inheritance tax) should be preferred to taxes that do distort the economy (e.g. income tax).
There is a clear efficiency case for inheritance tax. It does not affect people's economic behaviour. That is agreed by every single economist. Neo-conservative economists would also agree. Hayek and Friedman would be fighting my corner in this argument.
I would argue that there is also a clear equity case for inheritance tax, but maybe that is a minority view on this message board.
Complain about this comment
#303,
But how much inheritance tax would you have to pay on the house?
312,000 pounds = zero inheritance tax (IHT)
412,000 pounds = 40,000 pounds IHT (10%)
512,000 pounds = 80,000 pounds (16%)
612,000 pounds = 120,000 pounds (20%).
And once the Government's reforms (a ridiculous sop to the wealthiest 10% of the population in my view) implementing transferable IHT allowances is implemented, most households would not have to pay any inheritance tax on assets less than 624,000 pounds.
Any political party that wants to increase the thresholds even further or even abolish inheritance tax is only looking out for the very wealthiest in societ (maybe they don't realise this as having a third of your shadow ministerial team being Old Etonians can make you lose grip on reality I guess). If you are not part of this elite club of people, I would suggest that you reject sicilian's advice and don't vote for this party.
Bad for efficiency as well. If tax is to be reduced, why not start with the most distorting taxes rather than the least distorting tax. That's the way to reduce the impacts that the supposedly too high tax level has on incentives to work and invest, and so on economic growth.
Complain about this comment
#309 Balhamu
OK, accepting the need for society to finance itself, with Government acting as our proxy in this, using the civil service as a tool, we then face the question of what it is necessary to finance, and to what extent, and how to raise it.
Income tax (although the original reason to raise it has passed by) is a fair tax, by and large. People who are earning are in a position to pay it. The proceeds should go into the general fund, and help to finance the running costs of government.
NI is a tax. It is supposed to finance social sservices, but strangely not the health service. I'd be happier to pay it if I really knew what it was funding.
VAT is a tax, and very ubiquitous it is too. I'd love to know where it goes, other than into the general fund.
Road fund licence is a tax. I'd be happier to pay it if I KNEW that the proceeds were going to finance road and traffic improvements ONLY.
Tax on alcohol goes straight into the general fund, as does tax on cigarettes. These are cynical taxes, giving no benefit to the taxpayers, and being siphoned off for other purposes.
Tax on fuel - wow. If it went, with road fund to road improvements, yippee. But no, straight into the general coffers. The same with the salesroom tax on new car sales.
What else? Oh the insurance tax, the tax imposed on air tickets, and many others that El Gordo cynically introduced duing the past 11 years.
You might gather from this that I'm in favour of hypothecation, which is anathema to El Gordo, and most other politicians. It limits their ability to use our money as they see fit.
So, by all means introduce and justify taxation, but act responsiblly and tell us what it is planned to spend the money on, and see if it gets approval.
Naturally we are too far on the road to hell for any of this to count, so just fight to get all taxes repealed or reduced, and wait for a new government, and a new world reality. It's coming.
Complain about this comment
#311 herb
I take it you don't believe in what economists call 'externalites' - impacts that consuming certain goods has on others because there is no market in certain commodities (e.g. motor vehicles and air travel releasing pollutants and climate-change inducing carbon dioxide, as there is no market for the right to pollute the air; or motor vehicles in urban areas during peak times causing congestion and inconvenience for others caused by the lack of a market for road space at a particular time and in a particular place).
And you don't believe Government has a "nanny" role in discouraging consumption that is bad for people's long-run interests (e.g. cigarettes).
So Green Taxes and taxes on "bads" are out. Regardless of economic efficiency arguments (which again neo-con economists would make) they are undesirable from a philosophical perspective (the state shouldn't meddle).
Regardless of this, the Government has to raise revenue somehow, as you acknowledge. I take it you are more in favour of service charges (no redistribution - the poor are poor because partly because they are lazy, partly because our system of taxation and benefits does not give them sufficient incentive to work), and if you can't pay, you can't have services.
Fair enough.
Complain about this comment
Hazel Blears scares me - unlike most of the Labour idiots who just try to spin away from the issue, she just reverses reality - it's a good old trick
somehow she thinks blogging is bad for politics - the one way every single person can have their own independent say - no publishing costs or market factors, no wandering past a newstand to only see a dozen different viewpoints and sensationalist tripe - anything goes, everybody is equal - how is that bad
she doesn't like people criticizing the politicians and basically we should just shut up and let them do what they like, and of course in her view only politicians may come up through labour or the tories - what tripe (forgive repetition, I once got rejected for referring to someone as a sexual slave)
that evil little woman doesn't know the meaning of free and democratic
Complain about this comment
#313 tarquin
Michael Gove recently did an interview where he noted a number of New Labour ministers who he thought had the right kind of stuff to serve in the Cabinet under a future Cameron government.
Michael Gove, the shadow children's secretary, singled out Schools Minister Lord Adonis, but also warmly praised current cabinet ministers James Purnell and the 'outstanding' Hazel Blears.
Michael Gove loves 'that evil little women' and wants her to serve in a future Conservative Government because she is so outstanding
So, that evil little woman doesn't know the meaning of free and democratic
'Outstanding' qualities desired by Michael Gove to serve in the prospective Cameron cabinet.
Tarquin, you are not going to be a happy man I suspect.
Complain about this comment
#295 balhamu
And the good news for you (I'll leave aside whether it is right that your children should gain from the planning restrictions and increased housing demand that has given you so much housing wealth, but that is an aside) is that you are able to leave your children a couple of hundred thousand when you peg out - the Government will not touch it at all. Inheritance tax does not touch estates less than 312,000.
Actually, what I said was I would like to be able to leave my children a couple of hundred - I doubt whether I'll have anything left to leave them any more!
Complain about this comment
balhamu@ 314:
Micheal Gove and Hazel Blears are welcome to each other. I don't have any real liking for either of them. The only thing that drives my opinion is the gut feeling that shapes my own impression of politicians who really inspire me. That certainly doesn't include Gordon Brown nor any of the other weak sycophants on The Government Front bench. I respect Ruth Kelly for her decision to bail out and David Davies for willing to make a stand. The only two individuals who have impressed me greatly in recent months are Barack Obama and Vince Cable. Sad isn't it?
Complain about this comment
balhamu
I can't understand how you seem to think that everyone who owns the property in which they live is automatically wealthy, and that all that wealth is due to the planning restrictions and increased housing demand.
We've all got to live somewhere. Do you seriously think this was all handed to us on a plate? If I were to add up the wealth over the 33 year period, it would be minimal - and by that I mean under £10,000 per year. Our children went to state school. We've both worked (in very ordinary jobs), paid taxes and we are no different to thousands of other people in this country who are struggling to make ends meet. The same choices we had in the 70's were open to everyone in the 80's and 90's- you included!
The choices we made back then may enable us to have a better standard of living abroad than we do here, but we certainly won't be rich wherever we are, but one thing is certain. If we stay in Britain we will definitely be poorer.
Complain about this comment
#316 sicilian
I think Hazel Blears made some good points in her speech, which have been buried in the media reporting of the dig at 'cynical' blogs such as the one Guido operates.
She echoed the thoughts of many posters on here (who often complain that Labour is full of career politicians and academics e.g. the Milibands) about the importance of real-world experience in our politicians and the downsides of the new breed of career politicians that have a big influence in both major parties. I think the phrase she used was 'deeply unhealthy'. I suspect that you would share those views.
I think her views on the quality of political blogging also have merit. The standard of political debtate these blogs often engage in is low and focussed on trivia (e.g. Guido's obsession with "Jonah Brown" and the PM apparently picking his nose during one session of PMQs). The Government (and other political parties too) should be interested in raising the standard of debate in the blogosphere and making it more inclusive. It seems like it would be a key way of making political discussion more inclusive and representative.
I think a problem is that the blogosphere is largely right-wing, and those blogs that are left-wing are, in the words of Guido, boring due to their focus on issues rather than trivia, scandal and hypocricy. With a Labour government, issues do not matter so much - they just (in the view of right-wing bloggers) need to be kicked out of office by any means necessary.
Once Cameron has been PM for a couple of years, I suspect the standard of political blogging will increase. The need to kick the Government out will be removed (after a bit of further kicking in the years after they have been removed), and so right-wing bloggers will be able to return to the issues and begin sensible debate.
Complain about this comment
#317 shelling
But you have seen a massive increase in the value of your home, which is untaxed (and would not be taxed at all on your death, unless you have a home valued at more than 312,000 - soon to be 624,000 for most people with transferable tax allowances).
The increase in the value of houses have come not from everyone in the country working hard to improve their value (e.g. extensions, loft conversions, 'doing them up'), but in the increase in the value of land which has planning permission. This has been driven by increases in housing demand (demographic change and population growth) and slow response of housing supply (planning restrictions, the end of Government housebuilding programmes with the slack not being picked up by the private sector).
Everyone who owns a substantial portion of their home (e.g. those who have paid off their mortgages) are incredibly wealthy as a result. Compare what you have paid to purchase your house (the capital amount, not the interest payments on your mortgage) with what it is worth now. That is the wealth increase you have seen thanks to factors out of your control.
The increase in house prices we have seen represent a massive transfer of wealth from young to old. As house prices have risen, first-time buyers have had to give a growing amount of their future income to their parents generation.
This is going to hit home in the next 20 years. Politicians are going to come under a lot of pressure from wealthy, home-owning baby-boomers to fund massive increases in health spending, social care spending and pensions spending, using taxes on relatively poor people of working age who either rent or pay massive mortgage repayments.
The choices you made in the 70s, 80s and 90s are not open to those who weren't born in the 50s and 60s.
And how will you be poorer if you stay in Britain - crazy talk.
Complain about this comment
The left don't need small time blogs - they have the BBC
Complain about this comment
316. sicilian29
I found your comments interesting.
Imagine a party where Vince Cable and Frank Field played important roles? I believe both men are wasted. Cable in a party which seems to be going nowhere, and Field, unappreciated by a political entity which has lost all of its original ideology. If a new party was formed containing these two men, I believe it could be built up into a real challenge to the two lacklustre ones now feebly competing for the next elections.
Complain about this comment
#320 the_real_truth
The BBC is objective - why don't you right-wingers (and commerical competitors to the BBC) get your act together and take legal action against the BBC for failing in their legal duties if they are not? The lack of action would make it appear to me that calling them biased all the time is just rhetoric and posturing.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown is doomed to fail in his quest to gain kudos and respect by association with Barack Obama. It's not as if he's just come onto the scene after all. Rather he will be lumped together with George Bush, the bankers and the financial analysts who all failed to see the impending credit crisis coming and neglected as a result to take the necessary steps to mitigate it. Barack Obama and David Cameron share the role of blameless bystanders. Both will now be charged with the task of clearing up the mess that has been partly made by their opponents. It's an enormous ask and to be honest I think it should have been down to the present negligent encumbents to clear up their own mess and then if necessary die by the electoral sword if they failed.
Complain about this comment
re: 319 balhamu
Just because your house has risen in value, that doesn't make you rich.
It only makes you rich if you decide to sell your house and become homeless.
Or if you sell your house and buy a trailer to live in and a one-bed flat to rent out.
Or if you sell your house and move abroad.
The latter is very very tempting given that the economy generally is officially deep deep deep in the toilet with no signs of anyone in power willing to do anything about it.
Complain about this comment
#324 getrid
Or if you die and that wealth is transferred to your children.
And, of course, you always have the option to sell your house and rent a different one to release the wealth
Or when your children leave home and you retire, you could sell-up and downsize to a smaller house in a less pricey area as you no longer need to commute to your place of work
There's lots of ways of realising this wealth.
Complain about this comment
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7713778.stm
IMF Says:
"Worst hit will be the UK, shrinking 1.3%, followed by Germany at 0.8% and the US and Spain contracting by 0.7%"
Is that what Gordon Brown meant when he said we were "best placed"?
Nice one Gordon; let's hope Obama ignores absolutely everything you ever say/said and only ever speaks to you about what kind of biscuits you like with your tea.
Complain about this comment
#324 getrid
And given the global nature of the economic difficulties, you will find it difficult to escape them by moving to a different country (especially given language and cultural difficulties you will experience on moving).
Maybe a different planet? Or you could discover a new country?
Complain about this comment
#319 balhamu
The choices you made in the 70s, 80s and 90s are not open to those who weren't born in the 50s and 60s.
I can't help being born in the 50's. You make your own luck in this world with what little you have.
And how will you be poorer if you stay in Britain - crazy talk.
We did try to be prudent and save for our retirement but, alas, this was wiped out in the late 90's by -the man who purports to feel our pain - Gordon Brown. We could not survive on a state pension in this country when we retire in about 16 year's time. Just living here whilst we are both working takes almost all my spouse's salary. Luckily, we've realised this before it's too late to do anything about it. Look around you balhamu - the standard of living in other european countries is quite good, and it is a damn sight cheaper than Blighty.
Complain about this comment
re: 327 balhamu
Feel free to carry on believing the labour line that all our problems are 100% down to "global" issues and that our economy has no problems of its own and that labour have been running the economy really well.
I think the IMF kind of makes my point for me; their most recent statement that we're the worst positioned economy in the world because of how we've been run/regulated, and the recent history where they'd been constantly warning the uk that the way our economy was being run was destined to end up in massive financial collapse.
Complain about this comment
re: 325 balhamu
So what would your solution be? Compulsory habitation in government supplied "home cubicles", and nobody allowed to own any property?
Do you think it's wrong for you to be able to pass your hard-earned money to your children? Or are you just jealous that people who've worked hard all their lives have managed to pay off their mortgage?
Complain about this comment
#229 getrid
So every other country is still growing very rapidly and their financial system is just fine thankyou.
France, Germany, Italy, the USA and every single country in the world except the UK is still experiencing growth.
The only country in the world to have had problems is the UK, entirely due to the Government borrowing too much because it is useless and socialist, and incompetent at regulating.
Thanks for the lesson. I shouldn't trust the media I guess, as it has led me to believe this is a global problem.
Brown and Mandelson's satanic influence must run deeper than just the BBC. I mean, making up stories about world recession that have featured in every single media outlet and publications eminating from every single organisation in the world. It's beyond contempt.
Complain about this comment
balhamu
......and why should I sell my house to pay for my treatment and respite care when those who have done nothing and saved nothing get given treatment and care for nothing?
Complain about this comment
#330 getrid
I take it you came late to this discussion.
My comments were in relation to the rights and wrongs of inheritance tax.
I pointed out that, aside from the equity arguments which posters on here disagree with, there are strong efficiency reasons for inheritance tax.
Economists (including those favoured by Thatcher and Conservatives such as Friedman and Hayek, and James Meade and James Mirrlees) note that inheritance tax is more efficient than other ways of raising revenue (such as income taxes) as they have very little impact on people's behaviour and incentives.
So, if we accept that the Government needs to raise some revenue (e.g. to finance a rump government performing policing, defence and courts functions that even the most right-wing person would say Government should finance), an inheritance tax should be part of the tax mix. Abolishing it would mean that a more distorting tax would have to be levied instead (e.g. higher income tax), which would reduce the rate of economic growth.
I was challenged on whether it is moral to levy inheritance tax, the argument being that people have worked hard all their life to accrue so many assets and so have a right to pass on the fruits of those labours to their children).
I disagreed with that view for two reasons.
1. For most people, their wealth consists almost entirely of housing assets. They have seen massive capital gains on their housing, most of which has been driven by increases in the price of land with planning permission, caused by massive increases in housing demand with strict restrictions in the planning system preventing supply responding adequately. It is not because of working hard at all
2. These capital gains have, in any case, not been taxed, in contrast to other asset investments which are. This favourable tax treatment of housing distorts the economy, and leads to wild swings in the housing market that we have seen 2000-2008 and 1988-1993
Or would you claim that house prices have increased over time so much because people have worked hard to make sure that happens. They have sweated and toiled hard to make sure housing demand increases and planning remains restricted, and deserve to see large returns from this?
You are entitled to that view. Might find some difficulty supporting that argument though.
Complain about this comment
#332 shellingout
And why should taxpayers (who are generally less wealthy than you) pay for you to have social care to enable your children to inherit more?
Complain about this comment
#332 shellingout
And why should taxpayers (who are generally less wealthy than you) pay for you to have social care to enable your children to inherit more?
That would be an inheritance subsidy wouldn't it.
Maybe that's the right reform. Don't have inheritance tax, but use taxpayer's money to introduce a 'matching scheme' for inheritance -for every £1 you leave your children, the Government could top it up with an extra £5.
And by paying for it by abolishing unemployment benefit, sickness benefits and income support. A transfer of resource from the lazy and feckless to the good, hardworking folk who keep this country going.
It's a winner I think.
Complain about this comment
balhamu
So are you advocating that we relax the planning laws to make it permissable for anyone to build anything, anywhere, and then hand over these additional properties at knock down prices to anyone who holds their hands out?
If you want an affordable housing sheme, there are over one million abandoned properties in the UK. Instead of the government building on green-belt land to improve the demand, why not subsidise people to help them make good
these properties? The only problem with this is that it involves a bit of imagination on the part of the government and a bit of hard work on the recipent's part, but it's certainly a more environmentally friendly and sustainable solution - much better than concreting over the green belt, but not as profitabe for the government!
I pay sufficient tax on my earnings and I am neither wealthy enough to employ smart accountants to hide it all off-shore, nor shiftless enough to sit on my backside and expect the state to provide me with food and shelter. The money that I have left over I chose to invest in property - my property, and if it needs fixing or decorating, or goes down in price - that's my look out! If it goes up in price - that's my profit! I could, of course, have spent this money in the pub, bookies, scratch cards etc. I do not expect anyone else to look after us and would quite happily provide my own medical respite and social care, if I need it.
Unfortunately, we have a system where I have to pay for this whether I need it or not. It's called National Insurance - so I've already paid in and will continue to pay in. I am not asking for you or anyone else to pay for my social care, but I am unable to opt out of the system. Do you actually work? Just curious.
Complain about this comment
phoenixarisenq@321
Heartily agree. They're both committed, hard working, and sensible. The last quality being extremely rare these days.
Complain about this comment
314 - that's a given, a tory administration wouldn't please me in the slightest
tho personally I cannot see a prominent blairite crossing the floor, and if she did it's unlikely government policies would be so abhorrent anyway
Complain about this comment
balhamu:
I take it you are not touched by the problems with inhertitance tax. If I am wrong I apologise. Please expand.
Complain about this comment
339:
Sorry. Pushed the button before checking the spelling!! Too much red wine!
Complain about this comment
#336 shelling
The discussion is getting a bit side-tracked now.
There are three main points I'm making:
* most of the wealth that most people have (housing wealth) is made up of unearned capital gains from increasing housing demand and relatively fixed housing supply. Not due to their hard work and effort.
* inheritance tax is an efficient tax - if we wanted to reduce taxation (which many on here do), the primary candidates should be the most distorting taxes, rather then the least distorting one.
* only the very wealthy have to pay inheritance tax. A couple will have a combined IHT allowance of 624,000 pounds thanks to Labour's sop to the rich of doubling the effective threshold for most people. What % of people have assets of 624,000?
I hope you will push Cameron to make your party more responsive to your needs - hypothecation of taxation, privatise schools and hospitals, stop doing everything apart from core services (some police, defence, court system), tax on a fee-for-service poll tax basis (don't pay, don't get; don't need, don't pay) and abolish benefits to encourage hard work and family responsibility.
Complain about this comment
#340 sicilian29
No. I'm one of the 89% of people who do not have to pay the tax.
In 2004/05, 31,562 estates paid inheritance tax out of a total of 280,981 notified for probate (i.e. only the richest 11.2% paid any inheritance tax at all). Revenue from inheritance tax was £3 billion - equivalent to around 1p on the basic rate of income tax.
These stats are pre the recent reform that effectively doubles the threshold for most people from 312,000 to 624,000 pounds (through transferable allowances). HMRC don't provide detailed stats, so the best statistics on people affected would be looking at those with net estates in excess of 500,000 pounds - 9.467 people (1.5%).
Inheritance Tax Statistics
It would seem that policies to abolish inheritance tax would benefit 11% of people at the expense of the less well-off (including the middle-classes, which is why I'm surprised that they have been duped into believing this reform would benefit them).
The Conservative policy to further increase the individual threshold to 1 million would lead to only 2,745 people paying inheritance tax (1%). People with assets over 1 million pounds (that 1%) would gain 275,200 pounds from this reform. Those with more modest (but still putting them in the top 9%) assets of 500,000 would gain 75,200 pounds.
If this 1 million pound personal allowance was transferable (as Teresa May indicated would be the case), only 651 people would have to pay inheritance tax (i.e. the richest 0.2% of the population). People with assets over 2 million pounds (that 0.2%) would gain 550,400 pounds from this.
I'm amazed that people seem to think that this reform is something 'Middle England' will gain from. You will just forego a tax decrease (e.g. 1p off the basic rate of income tax, which would lose the same amount of revenue) that will benefit you by far more during your life (especially when you factor in that inheritance tends to be distributed between 4-5 people, making the tax gain to you be 1/4 to 1/5 of the total).
Assume you earn the median salary of £25,000 - you would pay £200/year less tax. In a two-earner household that would be £400/year less tax from the income tax decrease.
Assume you are a 2-earner household with £40,000 earnings (you are professionals and so in so-called Middle England). You would each gain £340/year (i.e. a total of £680 year).
Over a 40 year working life, these gains would be sizeable - £16,000 for the median earner example (need to be the sole heir of an estate of 352,000 pounds to benefit from IHT concession; or one of 3 heirs of an estate of 1.05 million pounds); £27,000 for the 2-earners (need to be the sole heir of an estate of 379,500 pounds to benefit from IHT concession; or one of 3 heirs of an estate of 1.14 million pounds).
The middle-classes would benefit by far more from the income tax decrease (1p of the basic rate) that reduces Government receipts by £3 billion versus the inheritance tax decrease that raises the same. This is achieved by capping the gains of the super-wealthy upper classes.
It's just crazy. I blame the media, and Conservative spin for making people want to focus tax decreases on the super-wealthy.
Complain about this comment
#338 tarquin
That's interesting - I had you down as a Conservative. You certainly (from what I remember of your posts) seem to have right-wing views. Surely a Conservative administration has to be the least worst option for you (you must be UKIP or something like that right)?
Complain about this comment
224 scilian
#Just as an add on whenever Hazel Blears speaks I either switch channels, mute the sound, or hum loudly. Is there anyone out there who does the same?
So thats how you get such a balance view, you only listen to conservatives,
I suppose you and shelling out shed tears into your red wine last night. Bless you both.
The smell of fear grows stronger!!
Complain about this comment
re: 333 balhamu
In my view, houses are no different to any other investments you might make, such as shares, and I think if you've made an investment then you should be allowed to decide what happens to the gains from it, and it shouldn't be taken away by the government just because you died.
Complain about this comment
#344 grandantidote
I suppose you and shelling out shed tears into your red wine last night. Bless you both.
The smell of fear grows stronger!!
I don't drink red wine - and I didn't shed any tears either. The good people of Glenrothes have spoken and I respect their views, although I don't have to agree with them. The smell of fear, as you put it, may just be the thought of all that waste making its way to Scotland to be disposed of....or didn't you know about that?
Complain about this comment
#345 getrid
So you believe that the Government should levy capital gains tax on housing instead of inheritance tax?
I would agree that levying capital gains tax in this way would be a sensible approach (and most people would face this tax at death anyway - as they only tend to leave the family home when they die).
There will be a lot of political opposition to it (dwarfing any political opposition to inheritance tax).
The middle-classes (whose wealth is largely housing) will lose out from a revenue-neutral reform doing this; the upper-classes (who have many non-housing assets) will win.
When do you thing this tax should be paid - at death or during working-life (e.g. from revenue from house sales to trade-up)?
Complain about this comment
344:
I do drink red wine but most of my tears had already been shed the night or two before listening to the complete antithesis of Gordon Brown, the very charismatic and hope inducing Barack Obama. That Election was far more earth shattering than the inconsequential event last night. Sorry to disappoint you but I don't do fear. Borne I suppose out of my battles with heart disease and melanoma of the eye.
Complain about this comment
re: 331 balhamu
You misrepresent what I'm getting at; I know there is a genuine global problem, but part of that was caused by the uk economy itself which was helping to fuel a mad unsustainable global boom built on debt.
Our domestic economic policies helped to cause the global problems, and also made our domestic economy doomed to collapse in its own right.
If we'd been managing our domestic economy properly then we wouldn't have helped made the global problems worse and we would have been in a better shape to deal with those global problems.
Basically if brown had had any idea what he was doing the last 11 years then we wouldn't now be in the worst position economically out of the entire developed world.
Every country has to deal with global issues, but you tweak domestic policies to minimise that risk and to act as a cushion against it.
ie yes, there are global problems, but our dire domestic situation which brown created is making things a hundred times worse and he still won't admit that "growth" based on mad levels of personal/public debt is a bad thing.
We are totally doomed until someone in power acknowledges the debt and the fact that we need to run things better.
At the moment Brown is in total denial, blatantly lying about the level of debt, and unwilling to admit that the general policy of creating false growth by using mad debt levels is economically bad.
Complain about this comment
224. At 10:18am on 05 Nov 2008, sicilian29 wrote:
Just as an add on whenever Hazel Blears speaks I either switch channels, mute the sound, or hum loudly. Is there anyone out there who does the same?
The wretched puppet is NOT a politician, and I can neither bear to see her self-satisfied face nor listen to the rubbish she utters. You are not alone, sicilian w9.
Complain about this comment
343 balhamu
Im sure Ive already had to explicitly state im no conservative, as you assume anyone who is anti-Labour is a tory
politically i'm far nearer to the lib dems, although I dislike having a solid belief in an ideology, and I was a supporter of Blair until a few years ago, but I have no time for brown and old labour - I'm an old style liberal, which most would describe as centrist these days, and socially I'm anything but conservative
although there is a liberal vein within the tories on some issues so I am certainly closer to them than labour, which I only point out as there is only a chance of one of those two forming the government
Complain about this comment
377 pammy ammy
#Heartily agree. They're both committed, hard working, and sensible. The last quality being extremely rare these days.
The most sensible thing about the two of them is that they both dislike Tories
Not disputing what you say, but I am curious to know why you believe that, I can, to a certain extent understand Vince as he is a shadow chancellor, but Frank Field is a back bencher that is no more hard working than MPs from both sides of the house, he used to be a minister a few years ago but he isn't minister material now, unless he were to cross the floor to the Tories the Tories could do with someone like Frank to at least make them look like a decent shadow cabinet, the same way that Vince Cable did to join the lib dems. Other than Vince who have they got?.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS