I think that sometimes words do not exist in the English language to express peoples outrage at what Gordon Brown did to the economy.
Then we are reduced to frustration and use of such words that you find objectionable.
I think you'll find words like competant, good, safe hands, sensible would fit the bill perfectly. A lot of people seem to forget the state the country was in 14 years ago when Labour took over, with a shortage of doctors and nurses, high unemployment, schools and hospitals crumbling. They seem to have done a decent enough job of putting things right until the US sub-prime debacle took most of the world economies into deep shlt.
I think you'll find words like competant, good, safe hands, sensible would fit the bill perfectly. A lot of people seem to forget the state the country was in 14 years ago when Labour took over, with a shortage of doctors and nurses, high unemployment, schools and hospitals crumbling. They seem to have done a decent enough job of putting things right until the US sub-prime debacle took most of the world economies into deep shlt.
A very good point.
People have forgotten the state the economy was in 14 years ago.
It was beginning to boom and the policies Kenneth Clarke had put in place were so good, Brown followed them religiously for two years.
However, I do not seem to remember seeing any schools or hospitals crumbling down but I do remember having A & E departments, cardiac units and other such trivia at our local hospitals. Under Labour, they all disappeared and became centralised.
Also please remember that for every nurse and doctor hired, the NHS took on 3 administrators. That is a matter of public record and was even spoken about on the daily politics program in depth.
I also remember that to lower the unemployment figures, Brown used borrowed money to fund public jobs thus creating a time bomb.
And the US sub prime debacle occurred because the US banks followed Gordon Browns ideas on economics, i.e financing growth through a rising house price market.
Sorry to burst your bubble on that one, but that is the fact of the matter.
I think you'll find words like competant, good, safe hands, sensible would fit the bill perfectly. A lot of people seem to forget the state the country was in 14 years ago when Labour took over, with a shortage of doctors and nurses, high unemployment, schools and hospitals crumbling. They seem to have done a decent enough job of putting things right until the US sub-prime debacle took most of the world economies into deep shlt.
No they didn't. They overspent massively in the first 10 years of Government - and that's before we even get to the unrestrained spree (in the middle of a recession following a crisis FGS!) they embarked on in the final years of their tenure.
As for Labour's contribution to Public Services, you need to go to the IFS for the bigger picture.
Spending on public services has increased by an average of 4.4% a year in real terms under
Labour, significantly faster than the 0.7% a year average seen under the Conservatives from
1979 to 1997. This is largely due to increases in spending on the NHS, education and
transport. Since 2000–01 public investment spending has increased particularly sharply and is
now at levels not seen since the mid to late 1970s. Despite large increases in the generosity of
benefits for lower income families with children and lower income pensioners social security
spending has grown less quickly than it did under the Conservatives.
Estimates from the Office for National Statistics suggest that public services have improved
considerably over the period from 1997 to 2007 with measured outputs suggesting a one-third
increase in the quantity and quality of public services. But this increase in measured
public service outputs is less than the increase in inputs over the same period; in other words
productivity has fallen. The relative price of these inputs has also risen, so we find that the
“bang for each buck” that we get from spending on public services (output per pound spent,
adjusted for whole economy inflation) has fallen more than productivity"
However, I do not seem to remember seeing any schools or hospitals crumbling down but I do remember having A & E departments, cardiac units and other such trivia at our local hospitals. Under Labour, they all disappeared and became centralised.
In 1997 we had a local police station which was manned 24 hours a day. In the early 2000s it was downgraded to a 9-5 operation and out of those hours you had to contact a station 15 miles away. A few years ago it was closed completely.
In 1997 we had at least 4 sub post offices within 2 miles. Now we have none.
People have forgotten the state the economy was in 14 years ago.
It was beginning to boom and the policies Kenneth Clarke had put in place were so good, Brown followed them religiously for two years.
However, I do not seem to remember seeing any schools or hospitals crumbling down but I do remember having A & E departments, cardiac units and other such trivia at our local hospitals. Under Labour, they all disappeared and became centralised.
Also please remember that for every nurse and doctor hired, the NHS took on 3 administrators. That is a matter of public record and was even spoken about on the daily politics program in depth.
I also remember that to lower the unemployment figures, Brown used borrowed money to fund public jobs thus creating a time bomb.
And the US sub prime debacle occurred because the US banks followed Gordon Browns ideas on economics, i.e financing growth through a rising house price market.
Sorry to burst your bubble on that one, but that is the fact of the matter.
Hate to tell you this, but your opinion does not equal fact:)
However, I do not seem to remember seeing any schools or hospitals crumbling down but I do remember having A & E departments, cardiac units and other such trivia at our local hospitals. Under Labour, they all disappeared and became centralised
I suppose people have forgotten all the stories about bed shortages or not enough doctors because of cuts in medical training?
I also remember that to lower the unemployment figures, Brown used borrowed money to fund public jobs thus creating a time bom
I think you'll find that was only after the recession hit
And the US sub prime debacle occurred because the US banks followed Gordon Browns ideas on economics
,
and that is just a bl00dy joke, or do you really think that everyone else in the world followed Gordon Brown without fail?
I think you'll find that was only after the recession hit.
Brown started borrowing money the 3rd year into NuLabours first term. It was at this point that massive amounts of money were thrown at the NHS, education, police etc. without any reforms or accountability.
and that is just a bl00dy joke, or do you really think that everyone else in the world followed Gordon Brown without fail?
Sad how many people do not know how or what the sub prime debacle was and how it was caused.
Sub Prime came about by the selling of mortgages and the over inflation on the value of houses..just what Brown was encouraging.
However, some banks and accountants were more savvy than Brown and wrapped up the over inflated debts into neat packages with other good debts and sold them on to other financial institutions worldwide. As Brown was appointed Chairman by the IMF of the Interim Committee to make sure events like this did not happen, it is not surprising that he missed it as all the US banks were doing, was following his economic policies.
All hail the great economist Brown, saviour of the world.
The sale return is the true value of a house. Borrowing money on what is the speculative price down the road caused this problem.
It's a confidence trick, Borrowing money against an over inflated asset as insurance. The asset falls in worth and crash, their goes the house of cards.
In what way did he personally f*** up the economy? He followed the same light touch philosophy as the Tories towards the banks. His Government encouraged home ownership no matter the cost, like the Tories.
While Chancellor he ran public spending as its lowest consistent rate for the entire post war era (38% of GDP) and in that time UK GDP doubled.
While public spending increased sharply during the recession it was and is still lower than that of Mrs Thatchers first two terms of office.
Surely your logic isn't because the Tories would have done the same, Brown had nothing to do with the recession? If you believe that, you'll believe anything
The Mail on Sunday has now apolgised to Brown and McNeill as this story was extremely inaccurate.
All those who were slating Brown about this so called incident have now got egg on your faces!!!
Last week we published a story headlined ‘The seven months pregnant woman told to give up her British Airways seat…just so Gordon Brown could fly Club Class’ and an editorial.
The flight was overbooked but we accept that neither Gordon Brown nor his staff received any special treatment from British Airways, nor behaved in any way improperly.
The Mail on Sunday has now apolgised to Brown and McNeill as this story was extremely inaccurate.
All those who were slating Brown about this so called incident have now got egg on your faces!!!
Last week we published a story headlined ‘The seven months pregnant woman told to give up her British Airways seat…just so Gordon Brown could fly Club Class’ and an editorial.
The flight was overbooked but we accept that neither Gordon Brown nor his staff received any special treatment from British Airways, nor behaved in any way improperly.
We apologise to Gordon Brown and Kirsty McNeill.
Fair dos if the events that they reported did not happen, then I put myself on the spot and apologize.
However, will Gordon Brown now apologize for wrecking the economy and being an economic terrorist? Is he big enough to say sorry like the Mail and myself?
Fair dos if the events that they reported did not happen, then I put myself on the spot and apologize.
However, will Gordon Brown now apologize for wrecking the economy and being an economic terrorist? Is he big enough to say sorry like the Mail and myself?
Dream on. The Daily Mail was big enough to apologise for a story that could be misconstrued, yet Gordon Brown refuses to apologise for wrecking the countries economy.
I know who I respect more, and I am not a Daily Mail reader!
Sometimes I wonder whether if Gordon Brown had been the labour leader when labour first came into power in 1997 instead of Tony Blair would he have been any better and would the country have been any better under Gordon Brown instead of Tony Blair?
As I seem to recall that the pair of them didn't see eye to eye.
Sometimes I wonder whether if Gordon Brown had been the labour leader when labour first came into power in 1997 instead of Tony Blair would he have been any better and would the country have been any better under Gordon Brown instead of Tony Blair?
As I seem to recall that the pair of them didn't see eye to eye.
I guess the big question is 'would Brown have got us involved in the ridiculous Iraq war'. Probably, yes. There might've been some differences on the home front though.
Comments
I think you'll find words like competant, good, safe hands, sensible would fit the bill perfectly. A lot of people seem to forget the state the country was in 14 years ago when Labour took over, with a shortage of doctors and nurses, high unemployment, schools and hospitals crumbling. They seem to have done a decent enough job of putting things right until the US sub-prime debacle took most of the world economies into deep shlt.
LOL - very droll
Read the article again (or look at the photo) - I think "being asleep" is a reasonable excuse for not knowing about it :rolleyes:
Anyway, why should he have to apologise for BA overbooking the flight?
A very good point.
People have forgotten the state the economy was in 14 years ago.
It was beginning to boom and the policies Kenneth Clarke had put in place were so good, Brown followed them religiously for two years.
However, I do not seem to remember seeing any schools or hospitals crumbling down but I do remember having A & E departments, cardiac units and other such trivia at our local hospitals. Under Labour, they all disappeared and became centralised.
Also please remember that for every nurse and doctor hired, the NHS took on 3 administrators. That is a matter of public record and was even spoken about on the daily politics program in depth.
I also remember that to lower the unemployment figures, Brown used borrowed money to fund public jobs thus creating a time bomb.
And the US sub prime debacle occurred because the US banks followed Gordon Browns ideas on economics, i.e financing growth through a rising house price market.
Sorry to burst your bubble on that one, but that is the fact of the matter.
No they didn't. They overspent massively in the first 10 years of Government - and that's before we even get to the unrestrained spree (in the middle of a recession following a crisis FGS!) they embarked on in the final years of their tenure.
As for Labour's contribution to Public Services, you need to go to the IFS for the bigger picture.
In 1997 we had a local police station which was manned 24 hours a day. In the early 2000s it was downgraded to a 9-5 operation and out of those hours you had to contact a station 15 miles away. A few years ago it was closed completely.
In 1997 we had at least 4 sub post offices within 2 miles. Now we have none.
None of these changes were due to "Tory cuts"
Hate to tell you this, but your opinion does not equal fact:)
So which of those stats were wrong?
I suppose people have forgotten all the stories about bed shortages or not enough doctors because of cuts in medical training?
I think you'll find that was only after the recession hit
,
and that is just a bl00dy joke, or do you really think that everyone else in the world followed Gordon Brown without fail?
Brown started borrowing money the 3rd year into NuLabours first term. It was at this point that massive amounts of money were thrown at the NHS, education, police etc. without any reforms or accountability.
Sad how many people do not know how or what the sub prime debacle was and how it was caused.
Sub Prime came about by the selling of mortgages and the over inflation on the value of houses..just what Brown was encouraging.
However, some banks and accountants were more savvy than Brown and wrapped up the over inflated debts into neat packages with other good debts and sold them on to other financial institutions worldwide. As Brown was appointed Chairman by the IMF of the Interim Committee to make sure events like this did not happen, it is not surprising that he missed it as all the US banks were doing, was following his economic policies.
All hail the great economist Brown, saviour of the world.
What's that got to do with it? Under Labour did A & E departments, cardiac units disappear from local hospitals and become centralised?
I don't think that when is an issue is it? Just that that's what happened....
Wasn't the quote just about the USA?
The economics of the never never.
Houses aren't worth anything until you sell them.
The sale return is the true value of a house. Borrowing money on what is the speculative price down the road caused this problem.
It's a confidence trick, Borrowing money against an over inflated asset as insurance. The asset falls in worth and crash, their goes the house of cards.
Surely your logic isn't because the Tories would have done the same, Brown had nothing to do with the recession? If you believe that, you'll believe anything
All those who were slating Brown about this so called incident have now got egg on your faces!!!
Last week we published a story headlined ‘The seven months pregnant woman told to give up her British Airways seat…just so Gordon Brown could fly Club Class’ and an editorial.
The flight was overbooked but we accept that neither Gordon Brown nor his staff received any special treatment from British Airways, nor behaved in any way improperly.
We apologise to Gordon Brown and Kirsty McNeill.
Fair dos if the events that they reported did not happen, then I put myself on the spot and apologize.
However, will Gordon Brown now apologize for wrecking the economy and being an economic terrorist? Is he big enough to say sorry like the Mail and myself?
Dream on. The Daily Mail was big enough to apologise for a story that could be misconstrued, yet Gordon Brown refuses to apologise for wrecking the countries economy.
I know who I respect more, and I am not a Daily Mail reader!
His former boss was not much good at that - lowest voting record of any post war PM. ( around 3% IIRC )
Why when he is picking up a very nice salary and perks?;)
I didn't say it was the best course of action for him.
I must admit that after years of scrimping and saving and being a law abiding citizen, I often wish I had been an MP
Gravy train all the way to the grave.
As I seem to recall that the pair of them didn't see eye to eye.
I guess the big question is 'would Brown have got us involved in the ridiculous Iraq war'. Probably, yes. There might've been some differences on the home front though.