Conservatives erase Internet history (UK)

stumason
reply to post by budski

 

It's all very well hating on the Government simply because you have some deep seated hatred of the Tories, but the figures coming in prove that "Austerity" (which in all honesty is simply spending within our means and not promising golden handouts to everyone like Labour) has not "all but killed" the country.

Well, yes it has, because now we are promised that austerity will last forever.

"Golden handouts to everyone"?
I see you've bought into the tory myth that labour ran the country into the ground, when the truth was it was the banks that did this - banks which are still paying out multi million pound bonuses whilst allegedly making losses, and refusing to put the QA money into the economy.
The same banks that the tories wanted even less regulation for, and the same banks which are still colluding in cheats, scams and rate fixing.
"Golden handouts" or "something for nothing" is exactly what the banks have been getting. The very people who caused this mess in the first place.

"Drip down" economics are quite simply the biggest scam in modern history - all that happens is that the wealthy keep more of the money.

I don't hate the tories, because it's impossible to hate an abstract, but their policies are killing this country stone dead.
They want to take us back to a time when workers had no rights, and that is simply unacceptable.

And labours answer to everything was borrow and give away! Ballooning uneeded government employees, handing out benifits left right and center and strangling the busniess that where employing people and making the country the money it needs to run.

every time.

Biigs
And labours answer to everything was borrow and give away! Ballooning uneeded government employees, handing out benifits left right and center and strangling the busniess that where employing people and making the country the money it needs to run.

every time.

The problem with that view is it's wrong.
Under new labour (for all their faults) national debt fell from 41.92% of GDP to 36.25% of GDP between 1997 and 2008.

Then of course the baking crash happened.
NL had to take some responsibility for this because they de-regulated the Financial markets (but the de-regulation began under Thatcher) but it shouldn't be forgotten that the tories wanted even MORE de-regulation.

After the banking crash growth fell until 2010 when it picked up again, and the economy grew by 2.3% until the tory driven austerity began to bite, which led us into a double dip recession.

Quite why I'm typing this, I don't know because it appears as though you've been reading the daily fail too much.

Regardless of all this, it seems the point about the tories trying to remove speeches from the internet has been lost.
"No top down re-org of the NHS" - no, they are selling it off instead.

"I didn't come into politics to make cuts" - another lie.

"Open government and accountability" - this kind of flies in the face of that.

"I have committed us to two per cent a year spending rises for the next three years. This will mean real increases for our public services." - Osborne. LOL

"When it comes to the firing, we’ve said we’ll introduce a power of recall to allow voters to kick out MPs mid-parliament if they have been proven guilty of serious wrongdoing." - yeah, right. NO wonder they wanted THIS one gone.

"The first step is to redistribute power and control from the central state and its agencies to individuals and local communities. Where it doesn’t make sense to give power directly to individuals, for example where there is a function that is collective in nature, then we will transfer power to neighbourhoods." - Camerons big society speech. What he meant was "Big Banks".

"We need to harness the internet to help us become more accountable, more transparent and more accessible - and so bridge the growing gap between government and governed" - osborne again, laughable really.

No doubt that was the plan all along, con their way in with the help of the libdems, then rape the country for the sake of the minority and the banks.

One thing to bear in mind is that I was one of new labours biggest critics when they were in power.
I wrote thread after thread detailing the stealth taxes imposed by brown, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the reckless further de-regulation of the banks.
But the fact is that despite their faults the vast majority were better off under a new labour government.

Under the tories, we have seen massive drops in living standards, inflation rising much faster than wages, huge swathes of people driven into fuel poverty.
Except of course for the wealthy.

reply to post by Biigs

And labours answer to everything was borrow and give away! Ballooning uneeded government employees, handing out benifits left right and center and strangling the busniess that where employing people and making the country the money it needs to run.

every time.

Why were large numbers of people employed in government run agencies etc? - because there simply weren't any jobs and millions were receiving benefits as a direct result of the previous Tory administrations completely destroying the manufacturing base of this country.

See how this pass the buck game works - Party A does one thing, Party B comes into power blames Party A whilst doing very little to alter their policies whilst in turn implementing their own policies, Party B gets dumped and is replaced with Party A and the cycle continues.

You acknowledge that we need people in employment earning and spending money to enable the economy to grow - that isn't happening at present - at least not in large areas of the UK.
At present money remains in the hands of 'the few' who refuse to invest it in large amounts in this country or it is being bled out of the country at an alarming rate in a number of ways.

Budski mentioned the dreaded N word in his OP - Nationalisation - got to say I agree whole heartedly. Along with a nationwide house building / renovating programme aimed at providing decent but affordable housing and genuine re-training programmes specifically targeting areas where there is a current or forecast skill shortage.

The sort of pre-election promises Cameron is trying to delete.

www.newstatesman.com...

An example;

1. No cuts to front-line services

As remarkable as it may seem, David Cameron told Andrew Marr the weekend before the general election that a Conservative government would not cut any front-line services.

"What I can tell you is, any cabinet minister, if I win the election, who comes to me and says: "Here are my plans," and they involve front-line reductions, they'll be sent straight back to their department to go away and think again. After 13 years of Labour, there is a lot of wasteful spending, a lot of money that doesn't reach the front line."

Since then, 5,870 NHS nurses, 7,968 hospital beds, a third of ambulance stations, 5,362 firefighters and 6,800 frontline police officers have been cut.

The bold emphasis is mine, I'm sure it needs no explaining why.

Another one;

2. "We have absolutely no plans to raise VAT"

In an interview with Jeremy Paxman on 23 April 2010, Cameron said: "We have absolutely no plans to raise VAT. Our first Budget is all about recognising we need to get spending under control rather than putting up tax."

VAT was subsequently raised from 17.5 per cent to a record high of 20 per cent in George Osborne's emergency Budget.

How many small businesses suffered thorugh this whilst tax reductions for the fat cats earning far more than most small business men and women - and a blatant lie.

It's quite a damning indictment of Cameron and his cronies - but please don't get me wrong, I'm sure if Labour were in power we'd be able to write a similar article on their broken promises - two sides of the same coin.

Freeborn

Budski mentioned the dreaded N word in his OP - Nationalisation - got to say I agree whole heartedly. Along with a nationwide house building / renovating programme aimed at providing decent but affordable housing and genuine re-training programmes specifically targeting areas where there is a current or forecast skill shortage.

It's interesting to note that despite the rhetoric, and the use of the words "labour bancrupted the nation", the UK retained its AAA rating under labour.
Funny that.

Back to nationalisation: the tories are opposed to it because they are slaves to the neo liberal agenda of privatising everything in sight.
It's quite clear to anyone with half a brain that this doesn't work. All that results is that private companies get something for nothing and then milk it for all it's worth, after the country has paid for it.
Otherwise known as profiteering.
In other words, the country pays for something, the tories sell it off, then they and their friends (and I include the blairites in that) sit back and rake in the profits whilst the people who paid for it in the first place pay for it all over and over again.

Nationalisation CAN work as long as there is a balance in the amount of power unions have.
Fiscal multipliers are the key here.
Borrowing over the long term has both long and short term benefits.

reply to post by budski


National Express handed the East Coast rail line back to the government 4 years ago at which point Directly Operated Railways took over the running of the line - it was in essence the only nationalised railway company in the UK.
In October 2013 it was reported that it generated a profit just short of £209million, significantly more than any other UK rail line. That money can be re-invested into the East Coast line or into any other government funded programme.

But of course this government intends to re-privatise the East Coast line with French company Keolis keen to buy it. In future any profit from the East Coast line will be syphoned out of the UK along with all the other billions that currently are being bled out of this nation.

The East Coast line receives significantly lower subsidies than other lines, privately owned Virgin Rail received 7 times the amount of subsidies that the East Coast line did.

The East Coast line is a perfect example of how a nationalised company should be ran in an efficient and professional manner without having private investors and shareholders.

After years of Nationalisation being very much a taboo subject recently a small but growing number of people are beginning to realise the immense benefits to the nation it could be if managed in a professional and responsible manner.

Just for a little light relief, something I expect many of us here have heard before.

It seems the lady in question has a book to sell, but knowing the bullingdon boys and their antics, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were true.

THE British chancellor has been accused of taking coc aine and partying with prostitutes in a sensational Spanish radio interview.

George Osborne was described as being ‘arrogant’ as he took coc aine and went to parties with prostitutes.

“George took coc aine on several occasions and went to parties where the girls were provided,” former call girl Natalie Rowe told DJ Kenny Jones, on his late night show on Talk Radio Europe.
She added that the politician had even come to blows over her at one stage, rolling around on the floor with her former partner William Sinclair.

“They were high and drunk,” she told the station, based in San Pedro. “George took coc aine on several occasions and went to parties where the girls were provided.”

In the explosive interview to promote her autobiography Chief Whip – Memoirs of a Dominatrix, she revealed how she charged up to 100,000 euros for one night.

She also frequently supplied Oxford University drinking club The Bullingdon Club – to which PM David Cameron was a member – with a steady supply of girls.

In further revelations she revealed that other clients of hers included actor Nigel Havers, best known for his roles in The Chancer and the late Simon Cadell from Hi De Hi.

Although her publishers were forced to hide the real names in the book, Natalie was able to name them on the show as it is based out of the UK.

Natalie was memorably photographed with Osborne in a picture that was later published by a tabloid with the headline ‘Top Tory, coke and the hooker’.

Osborne has always staunchly denied his connection to Rowe.

“George is lying if and when he denies this,” Natalie said. “Let him sue me.”

www.theolivepress.es...

Not much chance of seeing this in the UK press, even if it's true, but worth posting if only for the giggle factor

budski

Biigs
And labours answer to everything was borrow and give away! Ballooning uneeded government employees, handing out benifits left right and center and strangling the busniess that where employing people and making the country the money it needs to run.

every time.

The problem with that view is it's wrong.
Under new labour (for all their faults) national debt fell from 41.92% of GDP to 36.25% of GDP between 1997 and 2008.

Then of course the baking crash happened.
NL had to take some responsibility for this because they de-regulated the Financial markets (but the de-regulation began under Thatcher) but it shouldn't be forgotten that the tories wanted even MORE de-regulation.

After the banking crash growth fell until 2010 when it picked up again, and the economy grew by 2.3% until the tory driven austerity began to bite, which led us into a double dip recession.

Quite why I'm typing this, I don't know because it appears as though you've been reading the daily fail too much.

Do you really think Wall Street would let any country escape from their debt traps? It's the same trick banks play with credit card customers. Give the customer an extended credit limit at low interest rate, wait till they walk into the trap, and then suddenly raise interest rates to the point that the maximum amount of money they can pay is exactly matched by interest payments.

The problem with nationalization was that the companies ended up being inefficient. There were more people than work that had to be done, so they just started creating these tall pyramids of directors, assistant-directors, senior managers, managers, junior managers, trainee managers and engineers who actually did the work. I know in one IT support department, they had one director and three managers who all shared the same office. Next door, they had the lead technician and three other technicans. Most of the time they were just refilling printers with paper, fixing broken monitors and comm links.

After privatization, a good many of these jobs disappeared. Equipment became more reliable, and management chains become flatter on a ratio 1:8 rather than 1:3 as before.

The only way to grow the economy is to encourage new companies to start up. There are plenty of people who want to create their own start-up. But their choice will be based on several things. Availability of educated workforce (requires universities), low crime, good schools, no local political interference (certain political parties just love to push to have companies located in the socially-deprived areas just to prove they are "creating jobs"), affordable housing - rents/mortgages, good transport links (to attend USA / European conferences).

Problem with the North and North-East is that you always have to go via London to get to other places in Europe. It's always [North of country] -> Local airport -> Stansted/Luton/Gatwick/Heathrow -> Europe/USA. Usually that can take a day just to get to London. So London wins every time.

On the subject of speeches, you can download all the past government speeches from the following website:

www.britishpoliticalspeech.org...

You can download all the speeches using:

#!/bin/bash
COUNTER=0
for i in `seq 5 360`;
do
wget www.britishpoliticalspeech.org...$i
done

reply to post by budski


blair was up his own arze and assumed presidential possition based on labour middle ground support

reply to post by Biigs


i don't mean to laugh...

yes you are a terrible person

I suspect we are all in for a reboot, much sooner than later. It is called a Depression. The PTBs are blinded by their glitter and self importance, just as in the past. Forgetting that there has to be something real, a physical product has to exist to make the money worth more than tinder for a survival fire.

On the point of suppressing information in British Politics, it's not just the conservatives at it. And let's face it, going to war on the back of a 'presidential decision' is a bigger coverup than a few 'policy u-turn' videos...

Blair's cabinet was deliberately not kept as well-informed as the prime minister, the defence secretary, and the foreign secretary, in the runup to the invasion of Iraq, former cabinet secretary Lord Butler has said.

GUARDIAN

rickymouse
That is uncalled for. If we erased all the lies politicians said it would appear that we did not have any government in the past.

truer words have never been typed

It's quite clear to anyone with half a brain that this doesn't work. All that results is that private companies get something for nothing and then milk it for all it's worth, after the country has paid for it.
Otherwise known as profiteering.
In other words, the country pays for something, the tories sell it off, then they and their friends (and I include the blairites in that) sit back and rake in the profits whilst the people who paid for it in the first place pay for it all over and over again.

Kleptocracy?
2nd line.