Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
#1
Could David Cameron be secretly wishing that he will not obtain a clear majority at this juncture of the political and economic cycles.If he wins outright this time will the longevity of his political career be brought into question.Could it be a case of 'never look a gift horse in the mouth' or 'beware Greeks bearing gifts'.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
the subject of the "poisoned chalice" was raised on another thread.
would be nice to know what mr cameron and his cohorts really think.
with a coalition between the blues and yellows, the latter can always have the finger pointed them if things go badly wrong.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
Cameron wants a working majority, full stop.
Yes thanks to Labour we have a difficult situation and a lot of unpopular decisions have to be made whoever wins.
Someone has to make them and trust that people will be mature and sensible enough to understand why. If the chalice is poisoned then it has been poisoned by Labour and it is in all our long term interests to get a Government strong and confident enough to do what is necessary.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#4
not what was asked barry.
i think that secretly blues hierarchy would like the coalition bit for reasons stated earlier.
what will the unpopular decisions be?
all the literature i have promises no unpopular cuts.
#5
I think the turning point of this election will be when one of the three PM candidates breaks rank and actually tells us what his party is going to do to take UK out of trouble. The floating voters and waiverers will quite possibly be as moths to a light bulb when that happens.
Is any of them brave enough to be honest with us?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#6
The only Party that has all the information to provide such detail though Sid is Labour. If they had held their spending review when it should have been held there would be at least more information available to the opposition. Clearly that is why they did not do it, that and their not wanting to expose the true depth of the problem they have created.
#7
Barry, what you say may be true, but surely that just means being more careful in the wording of "What we will do to resolve the crisis".
The reason there is no movement in potential voting patterns is because the only people not wanting to talk about the mess we are in and how to fix it, is the politicians, or, put another way, the people who will have to make the tough decisions. If they can't give us a clue now, then why should we vote for them, after all, they may just be clue-less?
#8
Quite right Sid. The people like myself that aren't political and have still to make a decision want to base it on the facts of what the parties will do after the election, instead of just the slagging off of each other which is also alot of what we seem to be getting on here instead of the facts going forward!
#9
You cannot blame labour for the world wide recession Barry , the british chamber of commerce this morning have said the cuts the tories have pledged will be very difficult to make , that plus the tax rises that will happen whoever gets in could put us back in recession .
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
There is a lot more than just slagging off if you do look at what is really being said. labour though do gave little they want to say and try to create a smokeshield for their incompetence.
The fact is the opposition do not have all the information. Yes some details of cuts have been provided by DC but even those are problematical in the amount of savings that can be achieved because, for instance, no-one knows the break clauses in the contracts for id cards. The amounts estimated as savings are in the middle of a range so the actual figures could be higher or lower. It is simpy impossible to say too much.
Some have also estimated that the debt crisis in reality is double what the official statistics say due to PFI off balance sheet debt and public sector pensions.
The new Government is going to have to get hold of the Computer model at the Treasury and the 'books and contract' before it can give any information at all.
We have a massive problem here.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11
Mark - do stop this utter balls about blaming the world wide recession for our problems. We have moved on from that nonsense.
The fact is Brown has been in charge of the economy for 13 years and recessions always come and go they are a fact of life.
Brown claimed he had banned boom and bust and ran the economy as if he really had achieved the impossible. That is why we were in the very worse condition of all G20 countries at the beginning of the slowdown and were deeper and longer in recession than any other G20 country.
Brown screwed up the economy with an unprecedented level of incompetence.
#12
Barry you carnt ignore the worlds affect on this country ,if dc gets in he will have to work with the worlds leaders , Britain cannot do it on its own .
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
quite right mark, just look at greece with their austerity measures.
this morning the focus was on portugal, massive spending cuts and tax rises on the way there.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
Look - the fact is that Brown was deluded and he made the mess the UK is in through the following specific measures:
1/ changing the system of banking regulation - that is at the core of the bank bail-out problem. Not all the banks in the world were as badly hit as ours, far from it.
2/ messing up the inflation brief for the Bank of England. That resulted in the levels of credit in the economy being ignored in the setting of interest rates, hence the credit boom and the housing bubble.
3/ reducing the incentives for savers. That left people more vulnerable in the downturn with no savings and prior to that having to rely too much on credit.
4/ he failed to kep control of government spending. Debt has to be repaid even by Governments. The time to do that is during periods of growth but Brown did not do that, he kept spending and borrowing. The Government lived above its means. Yes Greece did the same and they have the added disadvantage of being in the Euro, that merely illustrates the fine tightrope that we are walking thanks to Brown, we could go the same way as Greece if we dont get a firm grip on spending.
5/ his tax policies undermined business and also the amount of red tape that he piled on business added to their costs.
There you are, five major reasons why the cyclical downturn was worse in the UK than elsewhere. Brown may have thought he had banned boom and bust but that merely illustrates his delusion and incompetence.
I can provide many more examples of how completely useless he was over pensions to the sale of gold.
Can you provide argument to the contrary rather than bland assertions that carry no weight of evidence?
Unregistered User
#15
Don't forget his 1997 hit on the pensions industry, Barry.
A travesty that has taken years to hit home with the public.
It is only when you get your pension settlements that the reality hits.
The other facet is the extra contributions from taxation that is necessary to get the public sector in balance.
Double whammy.
Watty