Miliband fails to learn Labour spending lesson

[Niceguy2]

Telegraph article

BBC Article

I linked the BBC article as apparently "David Cameron has himself acknowledged the difference between Labour and the coalition over the scale of cuts is only £2bn this year."

So in other words for all their talk on how nasty the Tories are, in fact if Labour were in power, the only difference would be £2billion of spending. That's peanuts really in the context of a £160billion annual deficit.

I generally consider myself to be a bit of a lefty and am in favour of quality public services and strong support for the vulnerable; however, I felt very let down by the last labour government, apart from taking Britain into an illegal war to support Dubya's revenge fantasies and religious visons. Despite the early new labour claims to have found the Third Way, balancing business and state, towards the end they fell into the very old labour habit of tax and spend.

Of course financial crisis was a global problem, but this just served to highlight those economies that were living on credit. Many economies have not been hugely effected and are now continuing to show healthy growth. At the end of the day, the last government failed to manage the economy properly.

"If Labour made the same cuts there wouldn't be the same fuss made at all, no strikes or anything."

Oh there would. Because unions are the Labour pary, believe that the Labour front-bench is there to do their bidding and know that they will respond to pressure for fear of losing grass-roots support. That's what happened in the seventies and there's every reason it would have happened again today if Labour were cutting public expenditure.

But Labour aren't in the hot-seat so it's rather an academic point :)

I have to say that this thread has restored my faith in MN. I stopped reading a while ago because most threads seemed to be mindless drivel.

I am glad to see that apart from one idiot everyone understands what has happened.

Socialists are only good at one thing and that is spending other people's money. They certainly did that during their 13 years and now it is time to sort the mess out, again.

'SWC, you know I am right Tories are selfish'

Hahahhaaa Newwave has, I see, rapier like debating skills. She'll be smashing up her toys in a funk next.

'I resent being called an idiot because I don't want to see the elderly, disabled and single parents of this country starving and/ or homeless sorry. I'm not quite that selfish to see my own gains as more important.'

What an embarrassingly absurd and cheaply sentimental viewpoint Edwardo. Or rather it would be if it didn't indicate that you had swallowed this peddling of lies hook, line and sinker.

Ttosca's link to Left Futures is worth a read.

The article starts with an interesting critique of Labour in opposition. Then it covers the structural deficit (£40bn) and provides a fairly comprehensive list of 'the lefts' ideas for tackling the deficit without the need for cuts to public services. It even has numbers (though no workings).

Very interesting - thanks ttosca.

Moondog

Hahahaha NewWave has, I see, rapier like debating skills. She'll be smashing up her toys in a funk next.

Nice reply but I note you are unable to refute my points with any facts just a ridiculous diatribe.

What an embarrassingly absurd and cheaply sentimental viewpoint Edwardo. Or rather it would be if it didn't indicate that you had swallowed this peddling of lies hook, line and sinker.

Trust a Tory to see concern for others as "sentimental" I suspect you would need a dictionary to understand the concept of "greater good" although I am sure you well understand what "self interest" is.

As for "peddling of lies" what lies, those such as:

those with the broadest shoulders will bear the biggest burden.

No top down changes to the NHS

Changes will not affect front line services

We will keep EMA

No changes to child benefit

No increase in VAT

Abolish student fees

(all copyright call me Dave & honest Clegg)

One thing though at least you give the lie to the Tories idea of a "Big Society"

I dont expect a coherent reply as I suspect it is something you are incapable of.

what newwave said.

just look at the policy nad stats regarding DLA the government estimates that there is approx 0.5% of people claiming DLA who shouldn't be, but they want to cut DLA by 20% by those calculations that means the tories are happy to take the food from 19.5% of disabled peoples mouths!

Put down your Guardians for a bit and have a go at something more challenging Newwave

Thanks Jack. Glad you found it useful.

Moondog

And I would accept the drivel from the Torygraph as gospel, dont think so.

I might just as well read the Daily Mail Hate.

Haha.
The Telegraph are scathing about the people currently in government. They give Cameron a very hard time.
You wouldn't know that of course, buried as you are in your student pamphlets.

First rule of thumb is to know your enemy.That's why I make a point of always reading the Guardian and mugging up on what new propoganda it spews out (see arse licking interview with Milliband today.)

there need to be some reductions- don't know anyone disagrees with that.
however they are targetting the poor,the weak and the vulnerable-which is typical tory.

I am tired of hearing this all the time. OK, so if you have to make reductions, name me one cut which does not affect the poor AND will actually make a difference to the deficit?

The ugly truth is that you can't really make any cuts which only affect the rich because by definition, the rich don't rely upon the state for their income. In fact, they pay the taxes. Whether you believe they pay enough, is another matter.

The unavoidable truth is that you cannot make such large cuts without affecting the poor. No-one has ever said otherwise. Cameron's punchline was the terrible "Those with the broadest shoulders...." line which frankly is just spin. Labour have been ridiculously silent on anything of substance. Just more banker bashing to pay for more spending commitments.

NG2

I am tired of hearing this all the time. OK, so if you have to make reductions, name me one cut which does not affect the poor AND will actually make a difference to the deficit?

Cancel Trident, raise taxes on the rich, make far more effort to persue tax avoiders, shut all the loopholes that are used to dodge paying tax, Tax bankers bonuses to the hilt (and if they fuck off so be it) after all call me Dave said no bailed out banker will get a bonus above £2600 (lying shit). Dont get involved in anymore wars.

BTW fed up with it or not it is fact that the Tories screw the poor, always have and always will.

"tax bank bonuses to the hilt (and if they fuck off so be it)".

Once they have gone is it ok to cut public services to fill the tax gap?

Just trying to work out what your priority is here. Maximising total tax income or punishing bankers?

Newwave

Sure...cancel Trident. Actually on this one I could agree with you. At first glance, Trident is perhaps a luxury we can no longer afford to have. I mean it's hard to defend closing schools & libraries but we have money to build nukes.

But then think about the knock-on impact to jobs? Highly skilled jobs who would be made redundant. Not to mention contracts with huge cancellation penalties. Contracts all signed whilst Labour were in power which the coalition are stuck with and legally bound to honour. It is estimated that cancelling Trident would cost between £65 billion - £90 billion.

None of your other "suggestions" are cost reductions but merely another round of banker bashing/tax the rich. Something none of the major parties are contemplating. And for good reason. Because like it or not, it would just drive away the "rich people" who pay way more tax than you & I ever will.

Given about £1 in £4 of tax raised comes from the financial services sector, when you are up to your eyeballs in debt, it's wise not to bite the hand that feeds.

Even if you could theoretically tax banker bonuses at 100% and not see a mass migration or a penny lost to tax avoidance, you'd perhaps make the tiniest dent in our rather massive deficit. Probably not even enough to pay for another Labour spending (cough) spree investment

Wow, didn't it get nasty here. I don't think that the Tories are targeting only the poor. I do think that everyone is going to be hit and I actually think is fair. Unfortunately, many people just expect things for free and it has to stop sometime. For example, the students protest for university fees. Most students from other countries have to contribute to their fees and why not? Sadly the Tories did a poor job in communicating how the fee structure works. Once I understood it I actually think it to be very reasonable. I aslo think that the very poor will still be ok but middle income earners will be hit the hardest.

Sounds as though you think the deficit is labour's fault even though George Osborne (when pressed) and Mervyn King agree it was the fault of the bankers. The George Osborne one is specially good to watch - giving evidence to the treasury select committee, clip available on youtube here:

Remember it was far right Bush that was in power in the US when the financial crisis hit.

If labour hadn't been in power for 13 years we wouldn't have public services to pull the plug on to bail out the banks. Has anyone noticed that their schools / hospitals / public services have got better over the last decade?

SWC you are pathetic,

Mervyn King agreed it was the fault of the Bankers although Brown needs to be castigated for not keeping their gambling under control. Did Brown cause the collapse of Lehman Brothers which precipitated the financial crash or the USA sub prime mortgage market, of course he did not.

Brown also caused the recessions in other countries as well

Keep on believing the Tory bullshit because that is all it is BULLSHIT

Yes.
Remember SWC you are nowt but feline ordure on the sole of the proletariat's BOOT!!!!!

"Brown needs to be castigated for not keeping their gambling under control"

But newwave - he did much more than that. He actively encouraged the rampant growth of the financial sector (at the expense of other sectors including manufacturing).

When the global banking crisis came - the UK was highly exposed. We had to pay heavily to bail out the banks, plus we lost a large chunk of tax revenue.

And Mr King didn't help matters with his low interest rates - which fuelled the vast increase in personal debt.

moondog

Do you have or have you ever have had the ability to post a coherent reply to any post.

I disagree with the right wing contingent on here but at least Jack, Comp, Chil, LFN and SWC and others can put together a view or opinion which can be attacked or debated or even at times agreed with.

You however appear to be unable to do any of those things, I suspect if you had an intelligent thought it would get very lonely.

When the global banking crisis came - the UK was highly exposed. We had to pay heavily to bail out the banks, plus we lost a large chunk of tax revenue.

Which is what I said, he should have had his foot on the bankers necks. He did not however cause the global financial collapse and his actions helped averted a far larger one, actions which Gideon opposed.

I would point out that Gideon supported GB in the matter of banking regulation and "light touch". His views in 2007 on the Celtic Tiger economy does not auger well for his stewardship of the UK economy.