Ian Duncan Smith

Éomer of Rohan

Cork, you hardly back up the disagreement deriving from the quoted excerpt!!

As for the Conservatives being the most successful party in the world, I could not agree more! They have managed to pull the wool over the eyes of every intelligent person who votes for them and have convinced them that free market economics are a good things is so far as western europe benefits and then when people point out that the lesser developed world suffers intolerable cruelties due to free marketeering and 'structural adjustment' they shrug their shoulders and act so blatantly uncaring that the electorate just assume that they are right! It's a large scale version of my own expert blaggings into our out of any situation!

Cork

convinced them that free market economics are a good things is so far as western europe benefits

The Labour Party belives in Free Market Economics.

This has been the greatest sucess of the Conservatives.

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery.

regi

So they'll probably elect Michael Howard. I bet he wishes he'd never done this interview

sceptre

Originally posted by Cork
The Labour Party belives in Free Market Economics.

Define "Free Market Economics" (or at least clarify what /you/ understand it to be), there's a good kid.

Bonus marks for explaining how there's a similarity between Conservative party economic policy of say 1986 and Labour party economic policy of 2003.

Depending on your definition I probably believe pretty strongly in "Free Market Economics". I've written pages here explaining why Con 80s economics was pretty useless though, hence my question

De Rebel

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
Cork, you hardly back up the disagreement deriving from the quoted excerpt!!

Please note that it is not Cork's practice to substantiate his opinions with Logic, Facts or Arguments.

Dasilva94

Originally posted by sceptre
Define "Free Market Economics" (or at least clarify what /you/ understand it to be), there's a good kid.

Bonus marks for explaining how there's a similarity between Conservative party economic policy of say 1986 and Labour party economic policy of 2003.

Depending on your definition I probably believe pretty strongly in "Free Market Economics". I've written pages here explaining why Con 80s economics was pretty useless though, hence my question

Perhaps he means Kinnock's rejection and expulsion of the Labour militants in 1985 and also his refusal to countenance re-nationalisation of the privatised utilities which many view as paving the road to Blair's victory in 1997?

Cork

Free market economics - Supply/demand economics.

No longer do they line up behind narrow producer or worker interests.

New Labour's is very strong on competition.

New Labour is very Pro Business and Pro Worker.

Sicialism has came a long way since nationalising certain industies.

sceptre

Originally posted by Dasilva94
Perhaps he means Kinnock's rejection and expulsion of the Labour militants in 1985 and also his refusal to countenance re-nationalisation of the privatised utilities which many view as paving the road to Blair's victory in 1997?

Hmmm, well he could. What you've mentioned would come a little bit before the press release announcing "all new whiter than Daz" Labour but yeah, it'd be there at the birth of the idea and probably did contribute in a sizeable way towards making Labout re-electable. I'd argue that these were more stepping stones towards New Labour than anything resembling Tony Blair or John Smith taking on any Thatcherite (Mathus' classical, Minford's neo-classical or <cough> Friedman's monetarist economics) or even eclectic-Keynesian policies (like those espoused by Tobin and Hicks) but it would at least be something certainly worthy of a discussion.

Let's see...

Originally posted by Cork
Free market economics - Supply/demand economics.

/falls off chair laughing

Don't you think that's just a teensy-weensy bit vague (look up page one of any economics text)?
Any chance of a bit of expansion on the above?

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Capt'n Midnight

Free market economics - Supply/demand economics.

No longer do they line up behind narrow producer or worker interests.

Please explain what "free market economics" has to do with the conservatives ?
with reference to the way Scottish North Sea Oil revenues were wasted in a way that cause interest rates to rise, thus helping the investments of Tories & Cronies but in the process killed off Manufacuring Industry in the North East. (£650Bn btw - and that was back in the late 70's)
wtr to the way Rover was sold to Rolls Royce for £200m - who then sold it off for £800m as soon as decently possible to BMW - who bought it cos it would cost them twice as much to bring out a new model (though they used to call it "The English Patient")
Poll Tax (only the rich can vote !)
Closing down mines that were unprofitable, when it cost much more to pay the dole afterwards.
Spending so much on an unnecessary war that they very nearly lost. (one carrier or one cruise liner and game over.. had the argentinians tried a mass aerial attack ... If the USA hadn't provided so much logistical support, had they not handed over the Argentian's defense manuals etc..)

Socialism has came a long way since nationalising certain industies.

RAILTRACK / BT /Water Companies / (BNFL) - there are a lot of companies out there that may have to be re-nationalised since for safety reasons or simply because the Govt would have to spend so much on them it would be cheaper to buy the company..

Anyone remember Dublin GAS - worth £2m on the stock market , so our Govt invested £50m rather than buying them out.. ( ESB could have run them..)

Dasilva94

Originally posted by sceptre
Hmmm, well he could. What you've mentioned would come a little bit before the press release announcing "all " Labour but yeah, it'd be there at the birth of the idea and probably did contribute in a sizeable way towards making Labout re-electable. I'd argue that these were more stepping stones towards New Labour than anything resembling Tony Blair or John Smith taking on any Thatcherite (Mathus' classical, Minford's neo-classical or <cough> Friedman's monetarist economics) or even eclectic-Keynesian policies (like those espoused by Tobin and Hicks) but it would at least be something certainly worthy of a discussion.

Well my analysis, not being a devotee of the dismal science,would be that the monetarist reforms of the Thatcher government were adopted by "all new whiter than Daz" Labour which devoid of a hard right tebbitite flavour resulted in their election. The 'winter of discontent' followed by the further leftward drift under Foot were far from vote winners. So one could say nu-Labour are the tories with a human face.

I think Howard will frighten off many voters and lead to another leadership vote with Portillo in the ascendant after the tories' loss at the next election.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Cork
Socialism has came a long way since nationalising certain industies

Socialism is not about the nationalisation of industry - that would be left wing labour.

Cork

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
Socialism is not about the nationalisation of industry - that would be left wing labour.

But Tony Blair has radically transformed the party away from a left wing party. The whole left/right thing is as gone as the Berlin Wall.

The Conservatives are searching for a policy platform to take on Labour. They won't win the next election but there is a future for them.

The Liberals are targeting vunerable tory seats - this will pay dividends for them.

But I think the Conservatives will be the main opposition party.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Cork
But I think the Conservatives will be the main opposition party

Opposition to WHAT? Their own policies!? Labour have gone centre right and the only way in which the conservatives would do anything differently is Europe and even on that Conservatives can't agree!

Mind you, if Conservatives ran up in the North and weren't in fact pseudo-fascists (the candidates they run here are, not the party in general) I'd vote for them on the basis of no top up fees!

Capt'n Midnight

RE: Mind you, if Conservatives ran up in the North

When was the last time they ran up North ?
And when was the last time the Unionist MP's voted against a conservative Government on anything (except for NI issues) ?

AFAIK They have a pact that way...

sceptre

Originally posted by Cork
<snippity snip>

No chance of you actually answering the comments from myself and Cap'n Midnight (which were only mentioned because of the inane comments above) then? You know, the economics bits.

Cork

Tatcher bielved that government should promote competition but in general she believed that state intervention and involvement in the economy should be limited.

Thus, she engaged in a policy of privatising many state services.

Labour have gone centre right and the only way in which the conservatives would do anything differently is Europe and even on that Conservatives can't agree!

But New Labour was right. They have won 2 mandates from the British electorate. They will probably win the next election. This is a big endoursement to the policys that were adapted.

The Conservatives have to find policys that will engage the electorate. Charging Leaders won't change their fortines.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Capt'n Midnight
RE: Mind you, if Conservatives ran up in the North

The Conservatives do run up here but not in the Westminster Elections and the party members who come over here almost always end up joining the DUP.

Quoted from Cork
But New Labour was right. They have won 2 mandates from the British electorate. They will probably win the next election. This is a big endoursement to the policys that were adapted.

No it is no such endorsement; first of all, history has shown that an electorate is slow to act even when there is no alternative and when this is in terms of party politics, even slower still; there is as yet no alternative since all three parties generally voted for in Britain occupy the centre right; thus we have seen voter turnout decline, some in conscious and some in unconscious protest and of course we must then accept that whether the majority of people like it or not, the centre right has loaded the dice.

As for winning two mandates from the British electorate, these were based on false policies which Labour have failed to act on - case study one "Education Education Education - we will NOT introduce top up fees at THIS time or ANY time" - T. Blair, liar-at-law.

Cork

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan


As for winning two mandates from the British electorate, these were based on false policies which Labour have failed to act on - case study one "Education Education Education - we will NOT introduce top up fees at THIS time or ANY time" - T. Blair, liar-at-law.

No party can make water tieght policys at election time and then hold on to promises for the life span of government.

Things change and governments need to adapt to changes in circumstance.

secret_squirrel

aaww come on lets not beat about the bush here, all parties will promise the earth come election time - knowing full well they only need to deliver about half of them to keep the proles happy.

You're being naive if you think any political party ever intends to deliver anything that they can get away with not delivering once the election is won...

sceptre

Originally posted by Cork
Tatcher bielved that government should promote competition but in general she believed that state intervention and involvement in the economy should be limited.

Thus, she engaged in a policy of privatising many state services.

I'll assume that means that you don't want to (or more likely, can't) answer the question then. You've had your chance.

If you just feel like debating Thatcher's economic policies while ignoring any link with Labour (as you have so far apart from saying "they didn't renationalise BT therefore they're the same:rolleyes: ), you might as well reply to my post here (in that thread). It's only about a month ago. Actually, you might as well read it anyway before getting back to me.

No-one's denying that Labour have moved away from their hard-left policies of the late 70s and early 80s. This is not the same as Labour either endorsing or following Conservative policies of either before or after 1986. You're posting rubbish and I hope you know it.

Cork

Labour has moved to the centre.

Tony Blair re-positioned Labour.

Political Partys do this all the time.


I think the Conservatives have a future.

I personally am no fan of the Conservatives but I think they'll be back.

Hopefully - the NI peace process will have taken strong root before they re-emerge.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Cork
No party can make water tieght policys at election time and then hold on to promises for the life span of government.

Things change and governments need to adapt to changes in circumstance.

How have circumstances changed? Blair and co knew full well that they were going to embark on a course of privatisation (see air traffic control among other which they had planned) and reigning in spending as much as possible; education was retracted before he'd spent the first bloody night in number ten near enough!

Labour never intended to fund third level education - neither do any of the other parties; they want training and that means resources such as those dedicated to arts and so on are being reduced - take QUB for example, it was Blair's poodle George Bain (oh he of the Bain report on the FBSNI) who closed the Classics department much to my lasting regret.

No political party under this system can be trusted to stick to their election promises - that much is fact. Call it naive to hope that they would and I say that it's idiotic to sit on your ass, do nothing and be cynical and still use the word naive as a critique in these cases.

Cork

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan


Labour never intended to fund third level education - neither do any of the other parties; they want training and that means resources such as those dedicated to arts and so on are being reduced - take QUB for example, it was Blair's poodle George Bain (oh he of the Bain report on the FBSNI) who closed the Classics department much to my lasting regret.

.

Éomer of Rohan - Third Level Education is expensive. In the Republic Of Ireland - more is spent of third level education than on pre-school, first level or second level.

I think - if resources are to be targeted - they should go to both pre school & primary.

But - I still agree with you - that all levels of education still need funding.

Now, getting back to promises - partys make them. But - say in Ireland - all partys except one have not a snowballs chance of forming a government. So, by and large - party manifestos are useless.

People don't vote on programmes for government.

But in the UK - partys should stick more to manifestos. (they don't bother with coalitions).

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Cork
But in the UK - partys should stick more to manifestos.

Thank you; that is a vindication of my point. If they promise something they stick to it.

A related point is of course that they cannot stick to it and the fundamental nature of the state is that it needs to keep resources dedicated to the workers at their lowest possible figure.

secret_squirrel

Originally posted by Cork
Hopefully - the NI peace process will have taken strong root before they re-emerge.

John Major was the first British Prime Minister to really make a go of the peace process for 30 years, Tony Blair has been living off his credit for years now. Look at the way he has allowed the process to stall.

Cork

Originally posted by secret_squirrel
John Major was the first British Prime Minister to really make a go of the peace process for 30 years, Tony Blair has been living off his credit for years now. Look at the way he has allowed the process to stall.

I give credit to John Major - he was decent.

But I think - he needed the support of unionist on certain votes.

I think politically - his hands were tied sometimes in parliament and relied on their support?

Blair has worked hard on the Preace Process.

I just would prefer to see it take root befiore any return of the Conservatives.

Éomer of Rohan

John Major inherited number 10 at just the right time - the ball had been rolling since British intelligence caught that Libyan arms shipment at sea and was accelerating since the bomb that the bastard IRA failed to kill Thatcher with.

Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem, they all want rid of Northern Ireland whether the Dark Age Party...erm I mean the DUP like it or not.

((On another note, has the swearing ban been removed or is the software to block the words just not working?))