In early 2008 when the GLOBAL financial crisis hit, the UK deficit under the Labour government was no more than it had been for much of John Major's.
Have a look at the first graph.
Very impressive speech by Ed Milliband
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Bernard
You don't make it clear whether your question refers to Ed Miliband, Osborne or both.
We have a huge housing benefit bill. Why do we have a huge housing benefit bill? Thatcher sold off a staggering amount of OUR housing stock at knockdown prices and they were never replaced either by the Labour government or the coalition. The result has been that private landlords have been raking it in in housing benefit.
30 years ago for every ?100 the government spent on housing, ?80 was invested in bricks and mortar and ?20 was spent on housing benefit. Now it is ?5 invested in bricks and mortar and ?95 on housing benefit. The Tory response? Sell more council houses at knockdown prices.
The Labour response:
1. Allow councils to negotiate bulk pricing deals on rents with private landlords and any savings can be used to build houses.
2. Given austerity has been a real disaster for Europe which the IMF now acknowledges - in the case of the UK - long term unemployment up, the deficit unchanging, the debt hugely increased, no growth etc etc. the Labour Party plan to take the IMF's advice and do what Miliband and Balls have suggested should be done for 3 years, bring forward infrastructure spending on houses to kick start growth rather than using the same money to fund an ever increasing unemployment bill.
3. The US has shown that by spending on infrastructure projects they have helped stimulate the economy and done far, far better than the UK has.
How is Osborne funding his scheme which underwrites 20% of the mortgage for wealthy individuals from here and abroad to buy 600K houses? Printing the money I would guess. Either that or nicking the mobility allowance from disabled people!
Remember Bernard, we are all in this together.
We have a huge housing benefit bill. Why do we have a huge housing benefit bill? Thatcher sold off a staggering amount of OUR housing stock at knockdown prices and they were never replaced either by the Labour government or the coalition. The result has been that private landlords have been raking it in in housing benefit.
30 years ago for every ?100 the government spent on housing, ?80 was invested in bricks and mortar and ?20 was spent on housing benefit. Now it is ?5 invested in bricks and mortar and ?95 on housing benefit. The Tory response? Sell more council houses at knockdown prices.
The Labour response:
1. Allow councils to negotiate bulk pricing deals on rents with private landlords and any savings can be used to build houses.
2. Given austerity has been a real disaster for Europe which the IMF now acknowledges - in the case of the UK - long term unemployment up, the deficit unchanging, the debt hugely increased, no growth etc etc. the Labour Party plan to take the IMF's advice and do what Miliband and Balls have suggested should be done for 3 years, bring forward infrastructure spending on houses to kick start growth rather than using the same money to fund an ever increasing unemployment bill.
3. The US has shown that by spending on infrastructure projects they have helped stimulate the economy and done far, far better than the UK has.
How is Osborne funding his scheme which underwrites 20% of the mortgage for wealthy individuals from here and abroad to buy 600K houses? Printing the money I would guess. Either that or nicking the mobility allowance from disabled people!
Remember Bernard, we are all in this together.
Another little snippet from the idiot left
Taken from a Labour website from a moron supporting that lovely Diane Abbot
"because of racist discrimination, often unwitting rather than deliberate and conscious (for example, employers seeking unnecessary levels of education qualification really as a means of thinning down the number of applicants rather them being a requirement of the job".
Yes that's right employers wanting people who are educated is only because they are racist.
"because of racist discrimination, often unwitting rather than deliberate and conscious (for example, employers seeking unnecessary levels of education qualification really as a means of thinning down the number of applicants rather them being a requirement of the job".
Yes that's right employers wanting people who are educated is only because they are racist.
Re: Another little snippet from the idiot left
Well they couldn't invent the wheel so what do you expect..
Johno
David Johnson wrote:
>
> The Labour response:
>
> 1. Allow councils to negotiate bulk pricing deals on rents with
> private landlords and any savings can be used to build houses.
> 2. Given austerity has been a real disaster for Europe which
> the IMF now acknowledges - in the case of the UK - long term
> unemployment up, the deficit unchanging, the debt hugely
> increased, no growth etc etc. the Labour Party plan to take the
> IMF's advice and do what Miliband and Balls have suggested
> should be done for 3 years, bring forward infrastructure
> spending on houses to kick start growth rather than using the
> same money to fund an ever increasing unemployment bill.
> 3. The US has shown that by spending on infrastructure projects
> they have helped stimulate the economy and done far, far better
> than the UK has.
>
So why didn't they do any of that when they had the chance? They had 13 years in power when rather than being very relaxed about people becoming very rich (many of whom seemed to be in the upper echelons of the party) they could have built more council houses. They could have made hay while the sun shines. If they get back into power in 2015 why should anyone trust them to keep their word this time?
>
> The Labour response:
>
> 1. Allow councils to negotiate bulk pricing deals on rents with
> private landlords and any savings can be used to build houses.
> 2. Given austerity has been a real disaster for Europe which
> the IMF now acknowledges - in the case of the UK - long term
> unemployment up, the deficit unchanging, the debt hugely
> increased, no growth etc etc. the Labour Party plan to take the
> IMF's advice and do what Miliband and Balls have suggested
> should be done for 3 years, bring forward infrastructure
> spending on houses to kick start growth rather than using the
> same money to fund an ever increasing unemployment bill.
> 3. The US has shown that by spending on infrastructure projects
> they have helped stimulate the economy and done far, far better
> than the UK has.
>
So why didn't they do any of that when they had the chance? They had 13 years in power when rather than being very relaxed about people becoming very rich (many of whom seemed to be in the upper echelons of the party) they could have built more council houses. They could have made hay while the sun shines. If they get back into power in 2015 why should anyone trust them to keep their word this time?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
"Johno?" - Steady on, old bean.
"So why didn't they do any of that when they had the chance? They had 13 years in power when rather than being very relaxed about people becoming very rich (many of whom seemed to be in the upper echelons of the party) they could have built more council houses. They could have made hay while the sun shines. If they get back into power in 2015 why should anyone trust them to keep their word this time?"
The Labour government did a shite job in building new council houses while in power. The big increase only came during Labour?s third period in office: between 2005/06 and 2008/09 it doubled investment from the historically low levels of its first term to ?32.6 billion.
They had more success in its pledge to make all social homes warm, weatherproof and with reasonably modern facilities under its new decent homes standard, which launched in 2002. Landlords were given until the end of 2010 to get their properties up to scratch. More than 80 per cent of all social homes had met the standard, compared with less than half in 1997.
Why should we believe that they will do what they say? No idea Would I prefer David Cameron back in power, or Nick Clegg or Nigel Farage? No thanks!!!!
Best of a bad, bad bunch.
The Labour government did a shite job in building new council houses while in power. The big increase only came during Labour?s third period in office: between 2005/06 and 2008/09 it doubled investment from the historically low levels of its first term to ?32.6 billion.
They had more success in its pledge to make all social homes warm, weatherproof and with reasonably modern facilities under its new decent homes standard, which launched in 2002. Landlords were given until the end of 2010 to get their properties up to scratch. More than 80 per cent of all social homes had met the standard, compared with less than half in 1997.
Why should we believe that they will do what they say? No idea Would I prefer David Cameron back in power, or Nick Clegg or Nigel Farage? No thanks!!!!
Best of a bad, bad bunch.
Re: Poor old Argie
labour? a shower of shite no if's or buts a pure shower of shite...end of thread
Re: Very impressive speech by Ed Milliband
Mr Awgazzm
Are you the webmaster for this site?
Is that why you declare a thread ended?
Are you the webmaster for this site?
Is that why you declare a thread ended?