Why would it be Ed Balls in a thread titled 'George Osborne's CV' featuring, in the OP, a link to Osborne's wiki page?
Because there are a few odd people on here that think a response to a thread about a Tory has to involve a reference to the Labour party however crass or irrelevant it may be.
Why would it be Ed Balls in a thread titled 'George Osborne's CV' featuring, in the OP, a link to Osborne's wiki page?
because the OP thinks osborne is a failure at everything he's done, including running the economy. if the OP thinks osborne is bad, then (god forbid), wait until balls gets into number 11. he will be far worse (my opinion). so, to me, my post was valid.
Because there are a few odd people on here that think a response to a thread about a Tory has to involve a reference to the Labour party however crass or irrelevant it may be.
don't call me odd.:D
i take it you are of the same opinion then when people bring up thatcher when we talk about the problems labour left us.
because the OP thinks osborne is a failure at everything he's done, including running the economy. if the OP thinks osborne is bad, then (god forbid), wait until balls gets into number 11. he will be far worse (my opinion). so, to me, my post was valid.
But the thread is specifically asking why this chap is allowed to run the economy. You'd only ask about Balls when and if he comes to power, surely? I mean, the thread couldn't be any clearer in its criticism of Osborne: he's in the title, he's the subject of the thread and he's the one running the economy.
What kept you? Kick off was a while back - your political point-scoring is late!
I suppose you didn't understand the OP either? I mean, why not start a thread on Balls if you want to discuss him?
ETA: Wait - do you want me (or others) to trawl back through other Tory Chancellors and try and score points back? Maybe some have had affairs, or been involved in sex scandals or dodgy financial dealings. That's how the game is played, isn't it - and it's much more important than...well.. actually thinking about the state of the economy or how the current Chancellor might do better, isn't it?
A cheat and liar to boot.
In 2009, he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home,[34] changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this.
What kept you? Kick off was a while back - your political point-scoring is late!
I suppose you didn't understand the OP either? I mean, why not start a thread on Balls if you want to discuss him?
ETA: Wait - do you want me (or others) to trawl back through other Tory Chancellors and try and score points back? Maybe some have had affairs, or been involved in sex scandals or dodgy financial dealings. That's how the game is played, isn't it - and it's much more important than...well.. actually thinking about the state of the economy or how the current Chancellor might do better, isn't it?
A cheat and liar to boot.
In 2009, he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home,[34] changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this.
Gideon estimated he owed £5000, then changed his mind to £550,000. Then said it was owed by Gordon Brown:D
I suppose you didn't understand the OP either? I mean, why not start a thread on Balls if you want to discuss him?
It means that even Conservative Central Command is finding it difficult to say anything nice about George (or they all went down the pub and so the only orders being given are for another bottle of champagne) - so they go to the default "oh look, flying monkeys" in an attempt to distract from that difficulty.
A cheat and liar to boot.
In 2009, he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home,[34] changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this.
Wasn't he one of those MPs who used their 2nd home allowance to pay the mortgage, pocketing any increase in value - or was that his boss?
But the thread is specifically asking why this chap is allowed to run the economy. You'd only ask about Balls when and if he comes to power, surely? I mean, the thread couldn't be any clearer in its criticism of Osborne: he's in the title, he's the subject of the thread and he's the one running the economy.
ok. osborne is chancellor, because in the eyes of the prime minister he is the best man for job. until he cocks up sufficiently to warrant removing from his position, he is going to remain chancellor.
ok. osborne is chancellor, because in the eyes of the prime minister he is the best man for job. until he cocks up sufficiently to warrant removing from his position, he is going to remain chancellor.
Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly want or like Ed Balls - but he has nothing to do with this discussion. I've seen little to commend Osborne, though. If the papers are to be believed, it's one broken promise and cockup after another. Yet his plan (such as it is) continues. If someone would like to step up and defend him, it would make me feel a little better that this man is in charge. Otherwise, it just looks like the cronyism of the Old Boys Network is at work, and competence be damned.
Comments
He's friends with David Cameron.
osborne or balls? osborne is the lesser of two evils.
Ohhhh the club you mean....
Bingo.
Well, not a Bingo club, but you know what I mean!
Why would it be Ed Balls in a thread titled 'George Osborne's CV' featuring, in the OP, a link to Osborne's wiki page?
Because there are a few odd people on here that think a response to a thread about a Tory has to involve a reference to the Labour party however crass or irrelevant it may be.
Not a failure in everything.
I heard he's very good with wallpaper.
because the OP thinks osborne is a failure at everything he's done, including running the economy. if the OP thinks osborne is bad, then (god forbid), wait until balls gets into number 11. he will be far worse (my opinion). so, to me, my post was valid.
don't call me odd.:D
i take it you are of the same opinion then when people bring up thatcher when we talk about the problems labour left us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_Balls
But the thread is specifically asking why this chap is allowed to run the economy. You'd only ask about Balls when and if he comes to power, surely? I mean, the thread couldn't be any clearer in its criticism of Osborne: he's in the title, he's the subject of the thread and he's the one running the economy.
What kept you? Kick off was a while back - your political point-scoring is late!
I suppose you didn't understand the OP either? I mean, why not start a thread on Balls if you want to discuss him?
ETA: Wait - do you want me (or others) to trawl back through other Tory Chancellors and try and score points back? Maybe some have had affairs, or been involved in sex scandals or dodgy financial dealings. That's how the game is played, isn't it - and it's much more important than...well.. actually thinking about the state of the economy or how the current Chancellor might do better, isn't it?
In 2009, he received criticism for the way he had handled his expenses, after he was found to have "flipped" his second home,[34] changing which property he designated as his second home in order to pay less capital gains tax. The Lib Dems estimated he owed £55,000 to the public purse as a result of this.
Gideon estimated he owed £5000, then changed his mind to £550,000. Then said it was owed by Gordon Brown:D
George Osborne on how to avoid inheritance tax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qjBec3fpBI
ok. osborne is chancellor, because in the eyes of the prime minister he is the best man for job. until he cocks up sufficiently to warrant removing from his position, he is going to remain chancellor.
Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly want or like Ed Balls - but he has nothing to do with this discussion. I've seen little to commend Osborne, though. If the papers are to be believed, it's one broken promise and cockup after another. Yet his plan (such as it is) continues. If someone would like to step up and defend him, it would make me feel a little better that this man is in charge. Otherwise, it just looks like the cronyism of the Old Boys Network is at work, and competence be damned.
So he's as daft as the rest. Students and smart moves tend to be mutually exclusive.
I wonder the story behind that is ?
How does one of the old Irish Arisocratic families come to be running a wallpaper shop ?
Did they lose their fortune along the way and have to go into trade ?
Surely not trade!
http://cdn5.beekman1802.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Untitled-10-550x456.jpg
At least he doesn't tweet his own name.
And he did run Cameron's successful leadership campaign.
I'd rather be stinking rich with a sh/te CV (like Gideon) than have a bloody brilliant CV and be poor as a church mouse as I am!
I curse my mother and father for not being rich bastards!