Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

We are in a world recession - is this really the time to listen to the media about 'boring' Brown?

111 replies

Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 08:41

Boring is good, isn't it. Maybe not for the media, but definelty for us. Isn't the media agenda for 'dynamic' news worthy politics contry top our national interest at this time? Have they been a bit spoilt by the drama of the Blair prime ministership?

Is is really the time to hand over power top the Tories who have an ideological interest in preserving the privledges of the rich - especially at this time?

OP posts:
Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 08:41

and for you pedants - contrary

OP posts:
Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 14:20

No takers?!

OP posts:
claricebeansmum · 25/07/2008 14:22

'Tis quiet news time at the moment and so this is all they have to talk about.

littlewoman · 25/07/2008 14:27

I like Gordon Brown - not dynamic, but stable. And good with the purse strings, apparently.

DeeRiguer · 25/07/2008 14:30

mt
your last sentence applies to labour too
they give good lip service to things but thats the size of it

pfi'd anything they can
id cards
illegal wars
shoddy interference in education
less personal freedom to demonstrate protest against them
stealth taxes everywhere

there is no difference between them..that is problem for both these political parties

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 14:33

No, DR, Labout have adapted to the changing world around them, things have changed yes, but they are not ideologically identical to the Tories. Really.

Anyway, can we not descend into a big steaming pot of 'everthings shite and everyones corrupt' cos thatis again, just what the media barons are depending on - our apathy!

OP posts:
posieflump · 25/07/2008 14:37

I thought we're not in a recession quite yet... just a credit crunch

noddyholder · 25/07/2008 14:38

GB seriously mismanaged the economy when he was chancellor!

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 14:49

Did he? We were doing extraordianritly well until a few years ago.

Mismanaged in what way - and in comparison to what?

OP posts:
noddyholder · 25/07/2008 15:06

We were doing well built entirely on borrowing over spending and selling off gold.All the high street spending boom and prosperity in car sales etc etc was all built on cheap mmortgages loose lending and people getting in over their heads.He didn't save while things were good and so has no £ now to do anything about the pickle the country is in.

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 16:37

That's what everything was based on. You can;t take UK sopending otu of context from the global economies or their partners, acn you?

OP posts:
Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 16:38

anyway, lets not get sidetracked please. Bacl to the questiolon of what the media want and what is actually good for us!

OP posts:
Bluebutterfly · 25/07/2008 16:41

I don't care if he is boring or not - he was the chancellor of the exchequer until a year ago and while I strongly believe that markets are cyclical and it was only a matter of time before a recession hit - it was the labour government with Brown as chancellor who stated that they would manage the economy so that boom and bust would be a thing of the past. Anyone who spouted that crap could not have understood much about economics (and it is not like i am some expert in that field either, but it does sound too good to be true even to the most idealistic amongst us, does it not?)

youcannotbeserious · 25/07/2008 16:42

Monkeytrousers: Is Gordon Brown paying you?

I don't give a stuff if he was a good CHancellor (which, persnoally, I don't think he was) - He isn't a good PM and the way he forced himself into power was just laughable. Makes a mokery of any sort of democracy.

He made no contingency plans in the 10 years he was Chancellor and it was bloody obvious to a fool that house prices couldn't keep going up the way they had.

People are being loaned stupid amounts of money with no reasonable way to repay it. It's stupid and it's being aided and abbetted by the government.

House prices have to fall. Sorry, but it's true. So what if they fall by 30% (worst case) - it's still a massive increase over the last 10-15 years.

noddyholder · 25/07/2008 16:44

I have just had an offer accepted today at more than 20% off asking.No more boom and bust

noddyholder · 25/07/2008 16:45

He wasn't even bloody elected!

electricluluarella · 25/07/2008 16:47

he basically stamped his feet , didn;t he? 'i had a deal with tony .. i am supposed to be prime minister' I bet he is ruing the day

it has been one economic disaster after another, and as he was chancellor, who can he blame?

he is unpopular, and does not have the charisma a leader needs.

Bluebutterfly · 25/07/2008 16:55

Agree completely elect. The idea that we should look at him in isolation from the policies that he was responsible for prior to his non-election to prime ministership is ludicrous. And of course we should never look at economics out of the global context - but did anyone tell that to GB?

It seems that he did not do very much to protect the UK from potential global downturns when the economy here was strong. That makes it alot harder to weather the storm now, I think.

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 17:26

well we get waht we deserve I suppose

OP posts:
DeeRiguer · 25/07/2008 18:25

mt
ideologically then, what are the differences?
we now have a nhs in name only..
idont really think labour have helped the people who put them there

i dont really want the tories in either but this spell of a labour govt has shown how alike they actually are..
agree also its a sham of a democracy really when pm can be shoehorned in like gb was...

if they want me to play along they have to do better than this
last election here (mayoral) we barely got a leaflet from them (and Ken, L, Labour was in colour PURPLE not red) wtf..

Original poster
Monkeytrousers · 25/07/2008 20:15

An NHS in name only?! I workin the NHS. That is a ridiculous statement, sorry. It's difficult to engage with this level of hyperbole.

OP posts:
policywonk · 25/07/2008 20:18

I agree with MT that the media is full of shit where Brown is concerned - journos are basically bored of domestic news (because they're thick and/or lazy, on the whole) and want a general election to perk things up.

However, the fact that the media is shit doesn't make Brown a good PM. He's a rabbit in the headlights - no strategy, no balls.

NotSoRampantRabbit · 25/07/2008 20:29

I agree that it is dangerous for the media to drive the political agenda by focussing on personalities - but then it is true to say that the labour government have used the media and 'peersonality' for their own gain repeatedly in the past decade.

Boring is good, yes.

But the media didn't create the various disasters that have befallen Brown. And the fact that they lost so many local council seats, London Mayor, and all the recent bye elections cannot be solely laid at the door of the media.

I think Brown is reaping what was sown in Iraq, Afghanistan. Public opinion has turned.

Not sure what's going on with my opinion at the moment. And am sort of hoping that Brown will come through before I have to vote.

NotSoRampantRabbit · 25/07/2008 20:31

And yes, pw, I just have a feeling that everything they do is knee-jerk and that Brown is not a level-headed political strategist but a big flapping fool without a plan.

DeeRiguer · 25/07/2008 20:31

yes in name only
if national health service, it would not be funded by pfi, infiltrated by private care companies, driven by ridiculous targets and charts, and it would not result in postcode lottery of care for those in need of its services

its not hyperbole, its my opinion
what you engage in is your business