Gordon Brown the Bully

[Catzsy]

So Gordon Brown did or did not sell gold at dirty cheap prices? - yes he did, its fact look it up if you wish - talk about burying your head in the sand.

Unlike you last post you don't say he sold all the gold but in any event yes it did sell some at a low price but if that's all you can come up with it's pretty minor considering that Britains Gross GDP is approx 1 trillion and this was a figure of 2 billion.

This did not create economic stability, it was simply a move that gave the Bank of England more power to take charge over something it already basically made the decisions for.

I'm not saying its not global and as I have said many times before, the recession is not the fault of the government. In that case and what I know as fact; neither was the boom time. This government simply stepped into office at a good time economically when the world market was booming and it would of occured under anyone who was in office at the time, the same with the collapse.

The difference is that Gordon Brown was so keen to accept responsibility for the boom time, after all he "abolished boom and bust" which the man should know is impossible, even if we had Jesus running the Treasury. The Labour government was ill-equipped because like all socialist governments, it didnt know where and when to stop spending and it still hasnt.

The labout government may have stepped in a reasonable time economically BUT it continued to maintain an economy that was the envy of the world for many years and it cannot be denied by anybody that he didn't do a pretty good job - doesn't matter if he was labour or not and whether or not you or I like Gordon Brown.

Unemployment figures do not include the other factors such as people who are on disability benefits and other benefits, the figure is estimated that the total number of people unemployed in the United Kingdom is over 8 million people who are economically inactive when a lot of them could be active.

Unemployment has never included these people whatever Government has been in and yes I agree that probably a proportion of them could be active however based on the fact that the same tests apply unemployment is still lower. The labour government has abolished incapacity benefit and replaced it with an Employment and Support Allowance. This means that many people currently regarded as having conditions so severe that they are exempt from even having to have a medical assessment will, in the future, have to undertake work related activities or have their benefits cuts. This is radical and I don't know any government in recent times that has taken these type of steps.

All very nice handing out free money, but whether or not you've noticed its not actually free at all. It comes from taxes, which have been raised and raised to pay for some of the biggest wastes ever such as EMA for example which is just ludicrous. £30 a week for teenagers to spend on sweets, booze and clothes is simply fantastic isnt it, meanwhile families have to cope year on year with rising taxes.

Heres an idea; instead of re-distributing wealth like this government and so many other socialist governments do, why not let the people spend their own wages on what they wish instead of the government taking it and spending it on red tape, complete waste of money 'projects' and things such as EMA.

This is a fundemental disagreement about what one believes in. I believe that
it is socially responsible for a government to look after it's people. You basically believe in a ' laissez-faire' style of running the country where everybody has to fend for themselves- I presume you would still want a national health service and free education though? What you forget is that EMA replied thousands of unemployed teenagers on the dole. Labour abolished benefits for teenagers aged 16-18 and replaced it with the EMA to encourage teenagers to go to further education to get skills. What they spend it on is their business, contributes to the economy and they have to attend and work hard at college to get it. It is not automatically paid. For every lecture a student attends a sheet has to be signed to verify it.

Do you know why VAT and other things had to be sorted in the Conservatives first years? - do you really because it sounds to me as though you are defending the most pathetic government in history (Callgahans) of which just to survive we had to go to the IMF. You know Thatchers reforms? - yes they were harsh, yes times were tough but at the end of it - this country was a complete turnaround from what it had been under decades of rotting socialism which has set in and were turning us into 'the sick man of Europe'. I suppose you also oppose the privatisation of the businesses and closure of the mines.

No I don't disagree with you about the state of the economy at all
but raising VAT by that amount hit everyone in the pocket and disproportionately the poorer of the nation, especially pensioners,who could least afford it. Measures could have been taken to spread it around a bit more via direct taxation. Then we had the farce of the Poll Tax that cost the country millions to implement and was abolished within 12months.
The conservatives had their own economic problems well into their second parliament.The pound sterling was forced out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism on 16 September 1992, a day thereafter referred to as "Black Wednesday. Soon after approximately one million householders faced re-possession of their homes during a recession that saw a sharp rise in unemployment, taking it close to 3,000,000(not including the economically inactive) . The party subsequently lost much of its reputation for good financial stewardship although it did recover. It's not all black and white - there is good and bad in every government.

No I don't oppose some privatisation but history has shown that privatising the railways has been a big mistake as the companies just haven't invested in it and it lags behind the rest of the world. I also don't agree with the privisation of cleaning within hospitals which is agree has been an unmitigated disaster - UKIP even say that it would bring matrons back and if so then it follows that the cleaners should also be brought back as there is no way to enforce a standard at the present time. As far as the closures of the Mines are concerned it is difficult because I do forsee a time when we might need these reserves of coal but I agree that Arthur Scargill was not a friend to anybody not even his own union. I do not blame Margaret Thatcher for the closure of the mines I blame him and his militant socialist friends.
There is a hell of a difference between red socialism and pink socialism as it is today.

[Inseriousity.]

I agree and quite honestly, Undertaker, sometimes your comments are about as informed as an ostrich burying his head in the sand and expressing himself through the parts exposed.

LOL, is that the 'nice Catzsy' way of saying "you're talking out yer backside" Only you would do it the long way round hehe, gotta love ya

Anyway yes back to 'bullying.' I personally think the word 'bullying' is overused. It is true that employees should expect true professionalism from their bosses at all times but I think they also fail to realise that the Prime Minister is also a human being, who makes mistakes + loses his cool.

On top of that, the whole thing looks fishy. What has the world come to when parties have to try to gain votes through rubbishing the opponents rather than through their policies... oh wait, been like that for a while now