Oh no, not another war.... (16)

'To loose' means 'to let go'. 'Lose' means you can't find it. 'Discrete' means separate. 'Crescendo' means 'growing'. 'Fulsome' doesn't mean 'full'. 'Unique' doesn't mean 'very unusual'.

For example, local authorities should break the law by evicting innocent people because that will send out a message that it is wrong to break the law.

Makes perfect sense.

And all men kill the thing they love, By all let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword!

Oh, yeah, cool. And let's do it before the bastard's are even convicted. That'll really show them how it's done!

In the beginning god created man ... that was his first mistake ... everybody knows the lady should always come first
I haven't a particle of confidence in a man who has no redeeming petty vices ~ Mark Twaine

I await the arrival of The Gang Tsar....

"You might well think that; I couldn't possibly comment"

Our cities in flames, our economy in ruins. Our health service, police and military decimated. But we are a strong people, we shall endure. The UK will survive Disaster Dave.

Although really I think, given the choice, I'd have rather just had an earthquake, maybe a nuclear explosion. I mean how long has this clown been in office? Fuck. I hear there are people in Tokyo and Gaza setting up charities to help us out.

The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.

I really think a TV series around you would be great. A sort of Alf Garnett of the left spouting crap and acting as a barrack room lawyer .

Out of curiosity Doghouse, who was in power when the economy had a downturn, under which party were the looters educated (educated that's a laugh)

Now sit in your armchair Sunny Jim & give us YOUR analysis as to how you would you get the UK out of the financial mess it inherited . Lets hear it from Doghouse as to what he would do as Chancellor

^Thunder^
@For_Sale_And_Wanted I.C's own Exchange & Mart| ThunderPix XXtra|

Wouldn't have made the cuts. Simple as that. You can't cut your way out of recession and debt. As every single country in the world enduring austerity measures demonstrates. The national debt can sit and grow, it's not an urgent problem. By devastating the public sector and double dipping the economy the Tories wrecked the country.

It's easy to blame Labour for the collapse of tax revenue that occurred when American banks broke the world economy. Easy and inaccurate, but whatever. However the cuts, and the economic meltdown we are currently enjoying, is all thanks to Hurricane Dave. We had a recession, now we have a double dip recession. It's his fault. Entirely his fault. Can't stress that enough, he took a bad situation and made it a disaster.

You never, never, never, ever make the sort of cuts he authorised to the public sector with the economy circling the drain. It's a guaranteed double dip recession. The well-being of the economy should have higher priority than servicing the national debt. Plenty of people saw exactly this situation coming from miles away.

Worth noting, for anybody who advocates the cuts, they are a massive failure. So when saying that 'Well your idea is crap' doesn't cut it, pretty much any plan would be better than what we've seen enacted by this government. Because they've essentially aborted any economic recovery we might have been able to put together the national debt isn't going to go anywhere. We're just going to lose our tax revenues and remain in the same hole we were in before, except without the jobs.

We've got the country burning end to end and we've got an economy that won't budge because the cuts have slaughtered consumer confidence. The future doesn't look too bright either as anybody except the rich and desperately poor won't get to go to university any more. Society and the economy are completely buggered and the Eton Massive have only been in power five minutes. Oh, and they are all a massive bunch of crooks in bed with a corrupt maniac media mogul. A mogul they were five minutes away from basically giving complete control of the UK satellite broadcasting market, no questions asked. Fun times.

And the scary thing, the really scary thing, is that Hurricane Dave has caused this much damage and devastation without really being able to get many of his policies through. He's been blocked from doing a lot of the shit that he was trying to do, like selling off the forests. If he was actually able to do what he wanted to do we'd be even further up shit creek, and we'd be so far removed from a paddle that we'd actually have a negative paddle situation. We'd have minus three paddles. Like some demonic outboard motor.

You would have to work really hard to come up with a strategy worse than Cameron's for getting the country back on its feet. He has literally done everything wrong.

The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.

Of course. The cure for debt is.... to get into more debt. Obvious when you think about it.

Hmmm. "He took a bad situation". That indicates it was there before he came on the scene. Which government, pray, would have been in charge, when that "bad situation" was created?

Agreed. Because they are NOT real cuts at all. What is happening is that we are STILL spending more than we earn, and borrowing is escalating all the time. IF we had true "cuts" (rather than spending more, but perhaps** not quite as much more as we might have done under Labour), we might have some chance of getting the economy and debt under control.

Let me help you by introducing you to an all-too-often disregarded matter called "reality".

(my bold)

Naturally, ALL those council chiefs earning more than the Prime Minister have chosen to cut their own salaries, rather than front-line services.

Just such a judicious approach is exemplified in, for instance, Haringey (responsible for - ah yes - Tottenham, epicentre of the riots). In 2005-6, it paid its councillors £885,933. Two years later, it was up to £1.35 million. Obviously, this must have been a “performance-related” decision; after all, the Audit Commission gives Haringey one of the lowest performance ratings in London. And Haringey's councillors receive 50% more in fees than Camden next door. And Haringey also employs over 550 staff earning more than £50,000 (and 21 earning over £100,000), 50% more than neighbouring Hackney. And Haringey is likely to lose £37 million which those high-performing staff managed to invest in Icelandic banks.

By the way, Haringey has been Labour controlled for 40 years. No wonder they are doing such a good job – after all that practice, it must come naturally.

Nice line in hyperbole. Let's be honest though - not exactly accurate, nor measured argument, is it?

Now, I'm guessing here, but I imagine you may be troubled by tuition fees. Which were of course introduced by that right-wing government of which errrr.... David Blunkett was a part, and the fees instigator.

Incidentally, on this point. That nasty decision to allow universities to add top-up fees. You know - the one where the 2001 General Election Labour manifesto stated that Labour "will not introduce top-up fees and has legislated against them.". The ones introduced two years later - oh, by Charles Clarke the LABOUR Education Secretary (shurely shome mishtake - Ed)

Yes, you DO know the ones - the ones where the cap was removed according to the recommendations of the Browne Report - you know, the one commissioned in 2009 by that paragon of Right-wing extremism, Peter.... oops, pardon me, now LORD Mandelson (can't remember him - must have been a Conservative, especially with all that financial chicanery and old-friend passport fudging). Oh, actually, the Browne Report, commissioned by Labour, said the cap should be removed completely. The Coalition actually rejected that, and set the cap at £9000. Presumably a Labour government would have felt honour (splutter!) bound to implement a report THEY had commissioned in full?

Interesting. So, everything that has gone wrong has happened in the last five minutes. The last lot left office with it all hunky dory, and in 13 years didn't put a foot wrong, and created a financial Nirvana.

Which is bound to happen when you sell gold reserves at a record low, cripple the best pension schemes in Europe, reward fecklessness, spend money you don't have on things you can't afford, and reward those who, for example, lie on mortgage applications, with a return to office so they can extend their corruption and, consequentially, qualify for a peerage.

Oh, and let me also point out the fallacy that Brown “created” extra jobs in the public sector. Governments don't create money or jobs. The private sector does. Then the private sector employees pay their taxes, from which public employees are paid. Of course, public employees pay tax too. Which means they give back some of the money they get from the Government, which only had it in the first place because it took it from the money generated by the private sector. So the private worker only has to subsidise public employees* to the tune of, say 80% of their gross salary.

Which is why it is good news – and another nail in the coffin of the myth of “increase public spending to escape the recession” - that Sir Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England has just laid out the TRUTH about how we are doing. “I would just point to one FACT, which is that over the past year the private sector has created over four times more jobs than have been shed in the public sector”. Official figures show that private sector employment rose by 540,000 in the 12 months to the end of March, while public sector jobs reduced by just 125,000.

Facts can be SOOOOO annoying, can't they?

English

* Of course, many of those public employees, the private worker is happy to pay for – the police, for instance (especially if they are on the beat, rather than acting as clerks), the bin men, nurses, teachers and so on. But if I were in Camden, for example, I would rather they kept the libraries open than employ (as they do) TEN climate change officers. (Leaving aside the questions over the true nature of climate change, to have an inner city council employing ten officers concerned with it is gesture politics of the worst kind. Unless China is persuaded to do something about the pollution it generates, it is rather like imagining that one person in Camden trekking down to the Embankment and spitting in the Thames will affect the tidal patterns of the Atlantic)

** Worth remembering too, that even Labour before the election acknowledged there would need to be "cuts" (ie, lower increases than the beneficiaries demanded, rather than actual "cuts"). The debate is over where to apply them. It is dishonest (how surprising) of Labour now to pretend otherwise.

"It may be that your sole purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others" - Anon

Edited 20 Aug 11, 1:53 AM by AnEnglishMaster

As I have said before - when has Doghouse allowed facts to get in the way of a good rant

Nice post BTW

^Thunder^
@For_Sale_And_Wanted I.C's own Exchange & Mart| ThunderPix XXtra|