£260m 'wasted' in axing school building plans

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

or if you trust none of them, you spoil your paper.
Mancie, my point was that they are all the same in that they bamboozle the electorate, they treat us like we don't have a clue about anything, they think that by letting us have a (supposed) say in some issues that they are 'connecting with the people'.......they like the fact that people argue and fall out about their relative merits because this all means that we are divided......and everyone knows that to rule you have to divide the populace...it makes them easier to handle.
They all call each other names, they say one thing in opposition and do precisely the opposite when in power......but you think they aren't the same.

Their manifesto's tell you one thing, but their actions another.

All of that is true Margaret..they all lie.. but there is a still a big margin in the idealology of the Tories and Labour.. not sure about the Lib's these days..seems to me the Lib-Dems have had radical left-wing manifestos for at least the last 30yrs, but now they have some power it's all disappeared...but with Labour and Tory there has always been a stark difference.. if there was no difference we would not have the arguements on here.. and no need for elections.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I don't think that it is entirely true....about the ideaology anyway. Since the advent of New Labour, the Labour party lost its Socialist roots and became more like the tory party.......there is no true Socialist party anymore...well, not in the terms that could win an election anyway.
You only have to look at the privileged backgrounds of the Labour MP's to check this out....how many of them have true 'working class' backgrounds? Not very many, and those who can be considered to have a bit of a working class background have all attended university. MP's are all wannabe toffs....that is why they can get away with telling us to pull in our belts, while they treat the taxpayer(you and me) as a bottomless pocket....and then look us in the face and lie about doing it.
Up the Revolution!

[Margaret Pilkington]

The reason why you cannot see the closing of the gap in the ideologies Mancie, is that you haven't lived long enough.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I don't think that it is entirely true....about the ideaology anyway. Since the advent of New Labour, the Labour party lost its Socialist roots and became more like the tory party.......there is no true Socialist party anymore...well, not in the terms that could win an election anyway.
You only have to look at the privileged backgrounds of the Labour MP's to check this out....how many of them have true 'working class' backgrounds? Not very many, and those who can be considered to have a bit of a working class background have all attended university. MP's are all wannabe toffs....that is why they can get away with telling us to pull in our belts, while they treat the taxpayer(you and me) as a bottomless pocket....and then look us in the face and lie about doing it.
Up the Revolution!

But the overall policies on the economy are certainly far apart.. the Tories always believe in the tight squeeze, they rely on the private sector to move into public sector services in the hope they provide a better more cost saving service.. they always do that and it does not work.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Maybe if they had not inherited such a financial mess it would not have been necessary.
We will never know what Labour would have done if they had managed to get back for another term of office so it is really all academic.

And yes, I do know that governments always blame the last incumbent for their woes....but I would hazard a guess that this government have got the worst deal in living memory....while in my living memory anyway.
Mancie we cannot get away from the facts that something has to be done to right the situation.......to cut the deficit.....and we know that there are people on benefits who could work, but won't get out of bed for anything less than they can get for doing nothing....and I resent them living on my earnings.....I do not resent those who have a justifiable reason for claiming benefits.......I resent money going out of this country to support polish children who do not even reside here.
You cannot have it all ways when there is nothing to pay for it.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Maybe if they had not inherited such a financial mess it would not have been necessary.
We will never know what Labour would have done if they had managed to get back for another term of office so it is really all academic.

And yes, I do know that governments always blame the last incumbent for their woes....but I would hazard a guess that this government have got the worst deal in living memory....while in my living memory anyway.

We are told what that Labour created the worse economic mess ever.. I was not even alive in the early years after WW2 but the then Government took over a waste land.. no blame to the Tories because all political parties fought that war and we where left totally skint.. Labour won the following election on the agenda of building schools.. the NHS.. pensions.. building houses...all opposed by the Tories.. it all cost money this country did not have.. but it was an investment in the future.
Margaret I don't know your age but surely you have seen Governments come and go.. they all blame the "last lot" .. but the Tories make a habit of punishing those less well off for any economic downfall.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by Mancie

.. but it's obvious that Labour spend money on public services.. and it's obvious that the Tories always cut those services...the difference is very real

Aye no argument there Mancie, but it is money they didn't have in the first place, that is the main problem ! Then of course the "Big bad Tories" or whoever where to follow the previous Labour Government (In this case the Coalition) has to try to recoup that debt & that means cuts.

It isn't supporting one side over the other, it is about basic economics... If you don't have it you can't spend it !! Unfortunately the Labour Government was doing exactly what many private households were doing, getting things on the never never, only problem with that though is that private households have to sort out their own financial problems themselves when the man comes calling, but when the Government do it ........ We know well & good who has to foot the bill then !! You, Me, Everybody has to dig deep, as Newton's third Law pointed out "For every action, there is an equal & opposite reaction"

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

Aye no argument there Mancie, but it is money they didn't have in the first place, that is the main problem ! Then of course the "Big bad Tories" or whoever where to follow the previous Labour Government (In this case the Coalition) has to try to recoup that debt & that means cuts.

It isn't supporting one side over the other, it is about basic economics... If you don't have it you can't spend it !! Unfortunately the Labour Government was doing exactly what many private households were doing, getting things on the never never, only problem with that though is that private households have to sort out their own financial problems themselves when the man comes calling, but when the Government do it ........ We know well & good who has to foot the bill then !! You, Me, Everybody has to dig deep, as Newton's third Law pointed out "For every action, there is an equal & opposite reaction"

Well yes Dave.. it looks like the general feeling is that the last Labour Government overspent on public services.. and that is an obvious difference between them and the Tories... most voters at the last election thought the Tories had the better a policy..there is a massive difference between Labour and Tory .

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by andrewb

Where is your evidence that it'll be a small one? There isn't even legislation on the table yet, so how do you know it'll be small? The said they would press ahead with one with or without international agreement - Labour would only do it with international agreement and set no timetable. It seems that you're just criticising them for not solving the mess they've been left within 3 months of office. It's going to take a great deal longer I'm afraid.

George Osborne's proposed levy on the banks of 8bn over four years. Ouch.

It's not a question of solving anything in three months, it's the proposed intentions. A very swift schedule of taxation was slapped on the table regarding us, the poor minions who live in this country, while the proposal for the banks needs time in order to consider the implications, does it?

You're still dodging the issue of why the 'coalition' aren't doing what they said they would do when they were in opposition. What has changed?

[Margaret Pilkington]

Mancie I am 63 and retired...so yes I have seen governments come and go.
In my opinion Tony Blair did more to bring this country to its knees than the Germans. Ok he did it in a different way, but nevertheless he did it.
Prudence Brown promised no more boom and bust but sold off the gold reserves when we didn't actually need the money and that meant that when we did need the money there was nothing in the pot. So when the doo-doo hit the fan he went into borrowing mode.

I have said it before and will say it as many times as is necessary.....we cannot have what can't be paid for.

I have worked all of my life. Paid into the system all of my life, am still paying taxes on my pension(and it isn't a big pension)......if the bus passes are to go, if the heating allowance is to go, then I will(like others) have to live with it. I won't like it, but I will know it is necessary. As long as the lard lumps who can't raise themselves out of their pits are going to feel it too, as long as the people who have paid absolutely nothing into the system are going to be targetted then I will manage.

I have been poor.....I know how to make do and mend.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

John, I am not a saint......you have to be dead for a few hundred years to get that kind of recognition.
I came from a poor back ground...lots of children(little contraceptive advice back then...other than 'don't do it') very little money,precious little welfare state despite the fact that my father was blown up on D-Day+6 and spent a lot of his time ill.

Everything I have, I have worked for. And it was tough getting a job when I left school because of the 'baby boomers'.
I have never expected anyone to take responsibility for my life. I figure that what I made of my life was down to me.
I worked in the weaving mill, but felt I could do so much more with my life......that is why I became a nurse. I wanted to make a difference.

What is missing from the lives of young people is esteem....you can have no esteem if you have no purpose in life.....no respect, either for yourself or for others.....because to respect others you first have to respect yourself.

No doubt when you were coming to the end of your nursing career, you will have seen a big change in the nursing profession, I have been a regular attender of hospitals over the last 30 years, and I've always found the older staff are absolutely first rate, don't get me wrong to me everybody working at the sharp end of the NHS do a fine job, but I get the impression from the new regime of nursing its more of a job than a vocation like it was when you first started out, that's just my opinion, talking from what I have witnessed first hand

[Margaret Pilkington]

John, I retired in 2002, at the age of 55.....I could have worked on until i was 60, but to be honest I was thoroughly fed up of government meddling, target chasing and the like.
I loved my job and felt privileged to be doing it. I worked hard because that is the only way I know.
I taught student nurses and tried to pass on my enthusiasm for caring for patients, but increasingly it seemed that the young women and men coming into the profession had a different focus......and it wasn't on care giving, it was about forging a career.
There is nothing wrong with forging a career per se it just has to be balanced with care giving. It seemed to me(MHO) that many of the new University educated intakes felt that taking patients to the toilet, or feeding patients, or dealing with personal hygiene needs were below them. Patients reveal their fears and their worries to the people who give such intimate care.

Now I am glad to be out of it....though I am always happy when past patients recognise me and remember me...which frequently happens.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

John, I retired in 2002, at the age of 55.....I could have worked on until i was 60, but to be honest I was thoroughly fed up of government meddling, target chasing and the like.
I loved my job and felt privileged to be doing it. I worked hard because that is the only way I know.
I taught student nurses and tried to pass on my enthusiasm for caring for patients, but increasingly it seemed that the young women and men coming into the profession had a different focus......and it wasn't on care giving, it was about forging a career.
There is nothing wrong with forging a career per se it just has to be balanced with care giving. It seemed to me(MHO) that many of the new University educated intakes felt that taking patients to the toilet, or feeding patients, or dealing with personal hygiene needs were below them. Patients reveal their fears and their worries to the people who give such intimate care.

Now I am glad to be out of it....though I am always happy when past patients recognise me and remember me...which frequently happens.

I think your spot on Margaret, 2 years ago when I was in dock, there was an old chap in the next bed, I heard him ask a nurse for a commode on about 4 occasions and was told she would see to him in a minute, that minute never came, in fact the nurse concerned actually went off duty without even telling other staff of this gentleman's needs, needless to say when somebody came to is aid it was just a little late. I was unable to help I was hooked up to oxygen and infused antibiotics and was unable to reach by buzzer. what made it worse was the morning after this same nurse had the cheek to say the old chap had got her into trouble

[Hiddlebit]

The last Tory government left power with unemployment higher than they inherited, and it was under that lot that unemployment reached record heights: at the time I worked in a Jobcentre and it was painfully obvious to all of us that the figures were a huge underestimate. Every time they changed the way we counted unemployment (more than 20 times in 5 years) the figure went down for a month before creeping back up.

It could be argued that the parties set each other up to fail: you'll notice that when parties know they will win an election they go to the country within 4 years, when they know they'll lose they go the full 5. And of course every party makes decisions with an eye to the vote and staying in power, rather than what is right.

So go for the "benefit scroungers" worth maybe £5bn according to the latest (probably inflated) estimates, not for the tax dodgers worth far more - government estimate, £40bn, pundit estimate, over £70bn.

Ideologically all of the parties have lurched to the right. Since Cleggie became the leader of the LibDems the party has lurched so far to the right it's almost as Tory as the Tories.