A Christmas Carole from the Lefty Tossers at the Mirror

[AJS-]

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

raharley said:

Simply amazing how many on this forum believe that 97-2010 was a period when 'the left' were 'in power'.

Here's a clue as to why.

That doesnt prove a left leaning it merely proves they were buying votes which isn't unique to the red ties

It shows they expanded the size of the state relative to the private sector, which I would call left wing.

[Globs]

raharley said:

Simply amazing how many on this forum believe that 97-2010 was a period when 'the left' were 'in power'.

For instance, New Labour WERE NOT A LEFT WING PARTY. Which renders void many so called opinions in this NPE forum every day. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is a staggering lack of political awareness from evidently normally astute members.

Oh dear, you really don't get it do you.
Do you really think the people running the Labour Party were not socialists??

Bliar, Straw, Prescott, Brown, Harman etc.

Come on, wake up, smell the coffee. The country was run by a bunch of socialists for over a decade, and they did what all socialists did: Tax and Spend. As a result Tax is about double from when they started, the state is much larger, there are thousands of new laws and regulations and we have the mother of all debts - the servicing of which costs more than the entire defence budget.

Oh and we are still in two wars.

PH is not about being right wing, it's about people smarter than you who can see what happened, and can do basic maths. The fact that NuLabour may not have behaved in the way you wanted a textbook socialist government should have behaved is irrelevant. It was classic socialist, an aggressive government that caused massive problems with unfettered immigration, an attack on the indigenous white majority peoples, huge additional taxes and a way of spending that would put anyone to shame.

What part of we are over-crowded, broke and full of lifestyle benefit chavs do you not see when you go out on the streets?

[thinfourth2]

AJS- said:

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

raharley said:

Simply amazing how many on this forum believe that 97-2010 was a period when 'the left' were 'in power'.

Here's a clue as to why.

That doesnt prove a left leaning it merely proves they were buying votes which isn't unique to the red ties

It shows they expanded the size of the state relative to the private sector, which I would call left wing.

Not left wing just fiddling the figures

[ukwill]

The Guardian is >>>>>

[AJS-]

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

raharley said:

Simply amazing how many on this forum believe that 97-2010 was a period when 'the left' were 'in power'.

Here's a clue as to why.

That doesnt prove a left leaning it merely proves they were buying votes which isn't unique to the red ties

It shows they expanded the size of the state relative to the private sector, which I would call left wing.

Not left wing just fiddling the figures

What's the fiddling part though? They expanded state spending from about 35% of GDP to nearly 50%.

[thinfourth2]

AJS- said:

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

thinfourth2 said:

AJS- said:

raharley said:

Simply amazing how many on this forum believe that 97-2010 was a period when 'the left' were 'in power'.

Here's a clue as to why.

That doesnt prove a left leaning it merely proves they were buying votes which isn't unique to the red ties

It shows they expanded the size of the state relative to the private sector, which I would call left wing.

Not left wing just fiddling the figures

What's the fiddling part though? They expanded state spending from about 35% of GDP to nearly 50%.

Look unemployment is down and look there is a brand new hospital VOTE Labour

Its goverment money which isn't real money.

Voters don't understand that the money the government spends comes from their pockets

[johnxjsc1985]

Did 1997 to 2010 actually happen or did we just sleep through it.

[ukwill]

johnxjsc1985 said:

Did 1997 to 2010 actually happen or did we just sleep through it.

It happened. Although the Labour apologists on here are in denial. Apparently the logic is we have had a Tory Govt for the past 30yrs. (yes I've read Simon Jenkins book...).

Even if that were the case, we had a Labour Govt in charge during our days of stagflation and the IMF bailout, and unfortunately for the lefties we can't blame either monetarist economics or Thatcher for either.

[johnxjsc1985]

If I were a Labour Party activist I would find it difficult to defend Labours legacy of Governement over the past 40 years it always seems to end in us being practically broke.
Conservative and Libs at least seem to understand that they have had to sacrifice the party Dogma and at least try and get us up of our knees.
What a pity the Labour party and the Unions seem hell bent on fighting them all the way instead of going cap in hand and begging for forgiveness.

[ukwill]

johnxjsc1985 said:

If I were a Labour Party activist I would find it difficult to defend Labours legacy of Governement over the past 40 years it always seems to end in us being practically broke.
Conservative and Libs at least seem to understand that they have had to sacrifice the party Dogma and at least try and get us up of our knees.
What a pity the Labour party and the Unions seem hell bent on fighting them all the way instead of going cap in hand and begging for forgiveness.

You're joking right? You think Labour Party activists think they've done anything wrong? If anything they'll tell you they haven't done anything near enough.

Besides, it's all Thatchers fault. Before her Britain was bloody marvellous. No really.

[Globs]

johnxjsc1985 said:

If I were a Labour Party activist I would find it difficult to defend Labours legacy of Governement over the past 40 years it always seems to end in us being practically broke.

If only we were just broke.
A conservative estimate on government (i.e. our) debt is £150,000 per household.