Just before the robbing Tory budget

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by Mancie

Oh .. I'm the blind one?.. can you really say that the finances of the majority of the population have been worse over the last 13 yrs than under the Tories?.. do you think the minimum wage was a bad thing?.have you forgot the hospital patients lying on trolly's because of cuts on nurses? the last 2 years have been a world wide economic crisis but did you suffer so much that you could not feed yourself?..everything was not all paradise but people forget what we had under the last Tory Government..Thatcher and her mob blamed Labour for 18yrs and I say this lot will drive us into a get what you can while you can society.. if there is any such thing as "society" under any Tory Government.

I'm certainly far worse off now than I ever was under previous conservative administrations. My servings are worth practically nothing, and what little interest is earned is taxed to the limit. The Tories cannot be blamed for the current state of affairs - and don't overlook the fact that the Lib-Dems have access to the books as well, and they can't both be accused of lying over the abysmal mismanagement of the UK economy as overseen by their predecessors!

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by garinda

Pre-election, Labour also faced up to the fact they too would have to impose severe cuts, in an attempt to sort out the current financial mess we're in, but they said they'd hold back doing it immediately, so as not to 'damage the economic recovery', but which we all know was really a way of trying to woo the electorate, by not having to think about cuts in the here and now.

Socially, and morally, the successive Labour governments made some historic inroads.

However, when it came to economics, they were hopeless.

They also courted the city financiers just as much as any previous Tory governments, and succeeded in making London the destination of choice for every dodgy oligarch, and dubious billionaire...hardly the actions of a party connected in anyway to socialism.

Under new Labour champagne flowed in trendy Islington, and a boom was enjoyed, with no thought of tomorrow.

We've had the boom, now it's cuts, or bust.

As others have pointed out, if you ran a household like the country has been managed, we'd now be pushing our worldly goods down the street in an old pram.

The political blindness exhibited by Mancie, Jaysay & co. can be quite amusing, if it wasn't also a little sad.

Like a red and blue Chuckle Bothers.

To me (it's Thatcher's fault), to you (no it isn't, it was all down to Callaghan).

Some speech that, Garinda, and there's a whole lot of truth in what you say. Maybe we should look back to the similarities that were occurring in pre-1939 Germany when Herr Hitler utilised the unemployed to build up a massive armaments program prior to his invasion of Poland which subsequently kicked off the second world war.

Could not what is happening in Greece and the imminent downfall of the euro with all it's implications for the European Union lead to another major conflagration?

[steeljack]

Originally Posted by Stumped

Could not what is happening in Greece and the imminent downfall of the euro with all it's implications for the European Union lead to another major conflagration?

Highly unlikely , who's going to fight it , the birthrates of the "native" northern Europeans are too low to sustain natural replacement as it is, let alone provide enough canon fodder to fight a full scale war.

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Highly unlikely , who's going to fight it , the birthrates of the "native" northern Europeans are too low to sustain natural replacement as it is, let alone provide enough canon fodder to fight a full scale war.

I sincerely hope that you are right - but remember Chamberlain and his 'peace in our time' promise.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Mancie

How can it be the past Labour Government be blamed for cuts this Government will employ?.. in this country the Government are all powerful.. with an overall majority they do what they wish... Gordon Brown nor Labour have a say in it and that's the way it should be.
In the past Margaret you have in your posts pointed out to people that it's no use blaming Thatcher or the last Tory Government.. yet you are quick to blame Labour and Brown.

It is a bit different isn't it?...blaming a government from the 1980's to blaming a government that has just left office, and whose politicians squandered lied and cheated the tax payer.....that is, unless it has escaped your notice, you and me.
And by your reckoning the government in power cannot be all powerful if they are left with the mistakes that go back to Margaret Thatcher.

You haven't answered the question that I asked earlier......how would you deal with the current financial crisis we have been left with?

The Labour government fostered a welfare dependent society...with benefits being paid out to people who had not paid into the system.
Britain no longer has a manufacturing base...which means we no longer make products to sell on the world market......we provide services, and these are not great earners, especially in the climate of global recession.

We have to realise that whatever services we use must be paid for...if you haven't got the money then you can't pay.
Try getting your shopping from Tesco without paying for it and see how far you get.
If Labour had got in do you think you would have been in for an easier ride?
If you think that then you obviously do not live in the real world or understand the problems that beset us.

[cashman]

The biggest load of crap was today when they said they are gonna consult the public oer were to make these cuts, what the hell have they been elected to do? this is the soft arse way out, the public tells em, then the publics to blame fer the pain, Get Stuffed n do the job ya were elected to do.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Stumped

I'm certainly far worse off now than I ever was under previous conservative administrations. My servings are worth practically nothing

I suppose savers enjoyed interest rates which peaked at 15%, which it did under the Tories in the eighties, but it didn't do much for the economy, and which was the main reason Thatcherist governments were obsessed about lowering it.

They'd have loved inflation to be as low as it is today.

[entwisi]

it was 15% for about 2 hours IIRC on the day of the crash. I was working at The Brit that day and when I told some business men they actually got up straight away and left mid meal.

The reality is teh man on teh street has 'felt' wealthy and had money and goods to show for it, problem is its all actually just held in debts and never never.

Total UK personal debt at the end of April 2010 stood at £1,460bn. The twelve-month growth was 0.8%. Individuals owe more than what the whole country produces in a year.

(Their bold)

so you haven't really had all this money Mancie its just waiting to come and bite you on teh arse. The reality is that the old goverment encouraged you to spend spend spend....

[garinda]

Originally Posted by entwisi

it was 15% for about 2 hours IIRC on the day of the crash. I was working at The Brit that day and when I told some business men they actually got up straight away and left mid meal.

The reality is teh man on teh street has 'felt' wealthy and had money and goods to show for it, problem is its all actually just held in debts and never never.


(Their bold)

so you haven't really had all this money Mancie its just waiting to come and bite you on teh arse. The reality is that the old goverment encouraged you to spend spend spend....

From July 1988 to May 1992 we had interest rates in double figures, and in 1989 and 1990 it was a constant 14%, except when it peaked, which is what I previously posted, at 15%.

The Thatcherist governments, which includes Major, would have wet themselves at the interest and inflation rates we have today, as that was one of their main economic policies.

[entwisi]

a better measure of affordability is not the rate but the percentage of salary to service your mortgage

in 1991 for FTB it was 60% in 2006 it peaked at near 140%.

Source Ratio of House Prices to Income | Finance Blog

now I'd rather have 40% left over from what I earn than be sinking deeper in debt.

there is always a different way of looking at life than just plain figures on paper, whilst this also brings it back to what Mancie says people feeling like they have cash in their pockets is a good thing and quite addictive but the reality is that it is unsustainable long term to live beyond your immediate means.

[Stumped]

Originally Posted by garinda

From July 1988 to May 1992 we had interest rates in double figures, and in 1989 and 1990 it was a constant 14%, except when it peaked, which is what I previously posted, at 15%.

The Thatcherist governments, which includes Major, would have wet themselves at the interest and inflation rates we have today, as that was one of their main economic policies.

Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see where the inevitable cuts will come. We can all probably second guess where the brunt of them will be applied, but until we see it set down in black and white, I guess we'll just have to sit back and hold our breath.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Stumped

Nonetheless, it will be interesting to see where the inevitable cuts will come. We can all probably second guess where the brunt of them will be applied, but until we see it set down in black and white, I guess we'll just have to sit back and hold our breath.

Some are already here, in black and white.


Accrington scheme to build 170 homes axed (From Lancashire Telegraph)

[Ken Moss]

The house-building programme is an obvious choice for cuts, not least of all because we have over 2000 empty properties in Hyndburn and official figures show that we have a net inward migration of around 200 singles/families per year.

Renovation of these properties and the return of a portfolio of council-owned housing would be a far more prudent investment, although the Conservative stance is quite different. The only new housing we are really in desperate need of is sheltered accommodation for the elderly.

The thinking goes along the lines of building new 'affordable' housing so that those who want to rise above the terraces have something to aspire to but the average wage in Hyndburn is £18k and the average price of a new 'affordable' home is £150k so the figures don't actually add up that well.

Anyone moving to Hyndburn knows what they are going to get in terms of housing, so why try and turn us into something we're not at a time when money is tight? Cllr Wells pointed out recently that new housing estates are lying almost empty because no one in Hyndburn can afford them.

Personally, I'm far happier in my mid-terrace than a Barratts shoebox.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Personally, I'm far happier in my mid-terrace than a Barratts shoebox.

It's horses for courses, and down to personal choice, but so am I.

I've lived in properties as diverse as an eighteenth century, five storey house built for the Huguenots in Spitalfields, to a brand spanking new city centre loft apartment in Glasgow, and now I'm very happily ensconced in a traditional nineteenth century Lancashire terrace.

I posted on here years ago, that in London and the south the typical mill workers terraced housing, that we still have an abudance of, would be refurbished, and cherished as part of our historical heritage, rather than be cleared, to make way for 'better' housing.

I remember much of the stone built terraced housing in Church was demolished in the seventies, and new, 'better' housing replaced it.

Thirty years on, the replacement, 'better' housing has had to be demolished.

My house was built in 1870, and will still be here in sixty years time, when it reaches it's bicentennial.

I rather doubt if many modern built houses will still be standing in two hundred years.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by garinda

I remember much of the stone built terraced housing in Church was demolished in the seventies, and new, 'better' housing replaced it.

Thirty years on, the replacement, 'better' housing has had to be demolished.

My house was built in 1870, and will still be here in sixty years time, when it reaches it's bicentennial.

I rather doubt if many modern built houses will still be standing in two hundred years.

It's this obsessive 'look at our shiny new housing programme what we we built, we did that, us, we did it' that rankles me.

You've hit the nail on the head and sooner or later we're going to regret the demolition of so many terraces as the vast majority are extremely well-built houses.

Find me a new house with a chimney. I'm in the process of having my fireplaces opened up for the installation of stoves and from listening to the chimney sweep I am certainly not alone. The increasing number of smoky pots in winter is also testament to the fact that people are going back to solid fuel.

Oops, shouldn't have said that.

'There will be a 50% increase in tax on solid fuels....'