What could you say....

[Fungus]

Closer to the truth than you realised it JW. It's a fundamental law of advertising: keep repeating the same phrase over and over again until people start to subconsciously accept it as fact.

Why do advertising companies keep sending you the same offer time and time again?

Because it has been shown that after the (7th) letter, people get curious and start to read the offer details and there's a chance of some business.

The one thing you must credit New Lier with and that's professionalism. I'm sure they have regular strategy meetings to decide the common line, and then make sure that everyone sings from the same sheet. It's much easier to sound convincing if you all say the same thing, and if you have all rehearsed responses to the oppositions likely responses.

[expat]

Take inflation for example: it's not 1.9% when compared with the 90's (more like 4-5%), the "basket" has been engineered by successive governments to show the most favourable value by including things such as cheap clothes and hi-tech goods. It doesn't reflect the increase in council tax, NI and other taxes, cost of housing, inheritance etc

wasn't it the Thatcher administration that removed housing costs from the basket, for that very reason? Fiddling the figures is an innovation that NL could not claim for themselves.

Doesn't make it any better, but it's not new.

Arguably NL often miss the point by blindly chasing targets; but the previous lot didn't even bother, they just declared that things were going well: "the NHS is safe in our hands".

[Fungus]

Actually Thatcher increased spending on the health service and policing.

Thatcher et al sorted out an economy that was the laughing stock of Europe, but they had to take unpopular measures, that had unpleasant consequences.

Then along comes Blair and Brown, riding on a wave of spin, creating a feeling that Tories were all dishonest snout in the trough fat cats. And they got in. But New Lier did not do much different from the Tories, apart from giving independence to the Bank of England. That was a very good idea but the Tories had already commissioned a study from the treasury on independence, so all New Lier had to do was implement it. But they deserve full credit for doing it. So for the first 5 years they coasted along, reaping the benefits of the deregulation of the economy by the Tories, and claiming the credit. Bear in the mind that the economy was doing very very well under Major, with employment growing, and unemployment shrinking.

But Blair et al presided over underinvestment in house building and roads and are now having to do an about turn. But the housing shortage, partly a New Lier creation, helped fuel a booming economy, driven by borrowing on housing equity. The other factor that fueled a boom was massively increased government spending on public services. But that is slowing, as is the consumer boom. And unemployment has grown significantly every month for the last year. Manufacturing jobs have fallen by about 0.5 million under New Lier, whereas public sector jobs have grown by about 800K (whereas they shrank significantly under the Tories).

The tax take as a proportion of GDP has been growing and is set to overtake Germany. Whereas Germany, which is starting to recover, is reducing its tax take. As are most other modern economies, if they haven't already done so.

And then we have pensions. We face a huge problem as the population ages, and people are not saving enough for old age. And yet Brown increased tax on pensions, taking billions each year, exacerbating future problems. To add to the misery, the 800K more public sector workers all get very good pension entitlements, which we will have to pay in 20+ years time. That is a definite case of give away now and pay later.

And lastly Brown has slowly been reregulating the economy, creating goodness knows how many new tax laws, tax regulations, benefits and so on. A lot of the time those entitled to benefits do not claim because the paperwork is too thick and too complex for most people expecially pensioners and the disabled. And companies are finding it harder to comply with the huge number of laws. If I recall correctly one of the more absurd entitlements is 6 months paternity leave. Now, if 6 months leave does not cripple a small company, then I'm a banana.

And regarding education, although more students are entering higher education, less of them are working class. So social mobility is reducing under NL. And people are finding that degrees are not worth what they once were, because the standards are often modest. I know from friends in academia that there is political pressure to reduce pass marks and hence increase the number getting 1sts and other high grades.

So yes they have done some good, more often they have not done too much damage, but overall they are storing up huge problems for the next 10 years as the economy becomes sclerotic and bureacratic.

Long live the revolution comrades and we'll keep the red flag flying here. Note that this does not imply that other colours are undesirable, or that red is in any sense superior. Nor does it dicriminate against those who cannot fly, or whose cultural and/or religious backgrounds do not approve of flags. Neither is it taken to be contrary to the collaborative non discriminatory non competitive common good.

Fungus

[hyperD]

...the "basket" has been engineered by successive governments...

wasn't it the Thatcher administration that removed housing costs from the basket, for that very reason? Fiddling the figures is an innovation that NL could not claim for themselves.

Yes.

[expat]

...But Blair et al presided over underinvestment in house building and roads and are now having to do an about turn. But the housing shortage, partly a New Lier creation, ...

Sorry, I'm having trouble grasping that bit. They "presided over underinvestment in house building"? I didn't know it was the Govt that built Wimpey houses. Or are you condemning the Govt for not building enough council houses?

Or are you just taking something that possibly happened and might have had bad consequences, and blaming it on the Govt?

[benn0]

Or are you just taking something that possibly happened and might have had bad consequences, and blaming it on the Govt?

On this board? - Never!!

[Fungus]

Sorry, I'm having trouble grasping that bit. They "presided over underinvestment in house building"? I didn't know it was the Govt that built Wimpey houses. Or are you condemning the Govt for not building enough council houses?

Or are you just taking something that possibly happened and might have had bad consequences, and blaming it on the Govt?

Builders found it hard to get planning permisson due to local councils rejecting proposals. Basically people were objecting to building in their back yards. The government eventually changed the law, or regulations, to make it harder for councils to object, and to push through new developments. I know of one case where the council refused, so another application was made in another area, that was refused, so the government overruled them.

Another problem is that it can now takea long time to get planning permission e.g. years rather than months. I don't know why it is worse than 20 years ago, but it is.

BTW you seem to have the same problem reading as MailMan. I said "presided over underinvestment in house building" not "underinvested in house building". There's no suggestion that the government were building houses.

[threaded]

Supposedly the reason it now takes so long to get planning permission is there is a lack of people to work on planning approvals. Seeing the increase in people working in the public sector I find this incredibly hard to believe. I think maybe because councils can now be over-ruled if they make a decision they are dragging their feet for as long as possible to avoid making the decision. Doesn't help that as a career it can be as prone to sudden death as working on the roads or railway tracks.

[zathras]

That pretty much sums the grim view on here. I see it like this, if you look on the dark side of everything every day you soon become constantly miserable. Labour are not doing a great job however they are not doing a dismal job (the soothsayers of doom have been proved wrong), there are many things people would like to see changed, but it is not beyond the inteligence of most to navigate around the tax issues and enjoy a lucrative existence.

So you have two options, be constantly derpressed or get on with enjoying life until the dream scenario of a conservative governement happens and there ceases to be anything to moan about ever again!

However like everything else you need to look behind the figures.

On inward investment we have been going down the league tables. As we have on productivity (productivity in the NHS has actually gone down). Inflation has been kept down but the only way we have to control inflation is via the money supply, i.e. the interest rate. That has been the responsibility of the BoE.

Unemployment may indeed be low but we have just gone through the longest sustained rise in unemployment since the last 90-92 recession. Indeed look at the jobs created and only 1 in 14 of them (net) are in the Private Sector. We actually employ less people in the Private Sector than we did when Labour came to power. Further the number of people economically inactive is at record levels.

Gordon Brown has increased the share of GDP taken in taxation yet his borrowing is at record levels and this does not include the billions in 'off-balance sheet items such as PFI agreements. Out balance of payments defecit is also at record levels.

No Gordon Brown and New Labour have not been doing anything approaching a good job, except in hiding the problems they have created.

[wendigo100]

Without so many people you wouldn't need so many houses or roads.

Net immigration has leapt up under New Labour - some would say it is out of control.

Ergo, New Labour deserve a lot of the blame for housing shortages and overcrowded transport systems.