If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
The labour government...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Gordon Brown. ‘The best chancellor Britain ever had’ what a joke! He has wasted all the tax revenue during the period that Labour has been in Government.
He has now decided to get a whopping great loan from the international banks and fritter it on new computers and the internet for the children of the unemployed. WHY!
Computers are available at schools and at the library for all to use and we taxpayers are going to get stuck with the bill. And it will not be small! Nice one Gordon!
New Labour have just sold all our nuclear power stations to EDF Electricity (owed by the French Government) after condemning Maggie Thatcher for selling off all the country’s utilities when the Conservatives were in power.
Do you trust the French, or any other nation, to be in control of our electricity? Prices will rise and we will have no control. Nice one Gordon!
Gordon Brown is planning to reduce your state pension, which you have paid into all your working life, if you live in a nice area. Will that apply to the Prime Minister, MP’s and civil servants pensions? I don’t think so, do you!
Britain has more dept now than ever before and Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling will not admit to future rises in taxes to pay for it! You have been warned!
Do you really want to see New Labour in government for another term?
Is there an alternative?
Does son of a millionaire, David Cameron, know what is like to have no money to pay the bills midway during each month?
Nick Clegg, who cannot manage his own finances, is he the man you want to run your country and spend your taxes?
New Great Britain was started by people like you who are worried about the future, for our children and grand children.
If you want to change the way Great Britain is managed, please view the following link for a breath of fresh air and a new political voice!
Contact ‘New Great Britain’ and join up, voice your opinion, its free and together we can change Great Britain for the better!
http://www.newgreatbritain.org/
He has now decided to get a whopping great loan from the international banks and fritter it on new computers and the internet for the children of the unemployed. WHY!
Computers are available at schools and at the library for all to use and we taxpayers are going to get stuck with the bill. And it will not be small! Nice one Gordon!
New Labour have just sold all our nuclear power stations to EDF Electricity (owed by the French Government) after condemning Maggie Thatcher for selling off all the country’s utilities when the Conservatives were in power.
Do you trust the French, or any other nation, to be in control of our electricity? Prices will rise and we will have no control. Nice one Gordon!
Gordon Brown is planning to reduce your state pension, which you have paid into all your working life, if you live in a nice area. Will that apply to the Prime Minister, MP’s and civil servants pensions? I don’t think so, do you!
Britain has more dept now than ever before and Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling will not admit to future rises in taxes to pay for it! You have been warned!
Do you really want to see New Labour in government for another term?
Is there an alternative?
Does son of a millionaire, David Cameron, know what is like to have no money to pay the bills midway during each month?
Nick Clegg, who cannot manage his own finances, is he the man you want to run your country and spend your taxes?
New Great Britain was started by people like you who are worried about the future, for our children and grand children.
If you want to change the way Great Britain is managed, please view the following link for a breath of fresh air and a new political voice!
Contact ‘New Great Britain’ and join up, voice your opinion, its free and together we can change Great Britain for the better!
http://www.newgreatbritain.org/
0
Comments
But anyway, I'm so furious at the concept that Gordon Brown managed to become the country's #1, the top leader, completely un-elected for this position by the British public, and no way would he have got elected at the time of changeover. Needs to be a general election at the change of PM-ship or something, its ridiculous for the country's leader to be unwanted by 80% of citizens!
"Do you believe that the classifications of some soft drugs are wrong and all non prescribed drugs should be made illegal and enforced?" (I don't even know what they're trying to say here, that we should make more things class c or more things class a?)
"Think of the CO2 from all that concrete!"
yes
Can't do any harm, but frankly pay isn't really the issue, housing, overstretch and post-service support are
Fuck no - we've got a good army I don't want to see it fucked up by a horde of conscripts.
Nope, army's got enough to do. Jails are the Prison Services job and they're probably better at it.
As for setting up a new political party, I wish them luck. It's about time that the stranglehold of Labour and the Tories was broken over this country. I certainly wouldn't mourn the death of either.
Oh well, another 20 months of hell for the UK until Cameron comes in and slowly tries to clean up the mess - wait until the start of 2009 when the credit crunch gets so extreme that many normal working class people won't be able to afford enough food for their family. No I'm not a Tory, but have no doubt Cameron and his shadow cabinet would be doing a better job right now than the incompetent, divided, bureaucratic Red Army.
I think we should be allowed to vote directly for our Prime Minister. Macavity should have had to fight hard in order to get the top job. He should have had to explain to the UK why he was the best person for the job. Say what you like about the US Presidential elections, but at least you know what McCain and Obama think. Nobody knows what Broon thinks on so many subjects. Of course, Labour wouldn't support this system - they know just as well as the rest of us that Gordon wouldn't last five minutes. Everything about this pathetic man cries "loser".
The president of the USA gets elected, the members of the house of representatives and the senate also get elected, but the speakers of the senate and house are decided not by the public, but by the other members of congress.
So SG, your basically saying we need a president?
Blair would have taken to that role quite well, if i remember correctly theres a post of SG's talking about the potential of Blair being president of Europe, mentioning Blair by name no less than 9/10 times in the single post.
From your website. There is a theory, if you borrow £5 but can make £7.50 from it then it's a good deal. That's why the government runs a deficit a lot of the time, because they are betting (sometimes wrongly) the money they borrow will make them money (or, 'benefit' for the economy). Like borrowing money to build a hospital might save money in the long term.
Because convicts are humans therefore have human rights.
Can go through and rip up a lot of the policies. I was hopeful when it said it was a party run by the average guy on the street, wasn't trying to marginalise someone but really it's just another spin on the current political parties.
Let's keep this nice and simple, so as not to confuse you. We would vote for our MPs at a General Election. We would later vote for our Prime Minister. Each party would put forward a candidate for this post. Each candidate would have to fight in a campaign to show us which one would be best for the job. The two elections could be held on the same day. How we decide what happens in the House of Lords is for another debate.
I actually think thats a reasonably good idea.
How would you get the ballot papers printed in time? And how would having a prime minister from one party controlling a majority of MP's which happened to be from a another party actually work. If you are voting [the public] for a position of PM, then even if you dont call it a president, you couldnt have someone directly elected to office twice? Its absurd, they run for MP or they run for PM.
SG i havnt twisted what you have said, you just misunderstand what PRIME MINISTER means, the postition is known as Primus Inter Pares, which is latin for first amongst equals. MP's are all elected as equals, and it is amongst their [winning] party that they chose who would be the first amongst them.
If you have someone directly elected, without causing enough logistical problems to sink north america. Then that would be a president. Who is not first amongst equals, and there for is not Primus Inter Pares, and not a prime minister.
Get your politics books out before going off on a rant SG.
I said something which i thought was a genuine observation, and yet you get yourself into your usual mad lather of daily mail rant mode. If you actually tried to stop the red mist descending sometimes, you might be able to have a common sense argument with someone sometime.
(2) If it means politicians having to work together a bit more, I'd be all for it. You probably want my thoughts on the implications for the monarchy. There wouldn't be any at all really. The monarch is a figurehead, more than anything else, so a system like this wouldn't mean becoming a corrupt republic headed by some British version of Jacques Chirac.
While i dont mind the monarchy, i wouldnt miss it if it went.
Thing about the ballot papers is, they wont print them until an election is called. Who knows what can happen in a year, as was once famously said, a week is a long time in politics.
They also have set dates for future elections, house elections every 2 years, presidential every 4, a third of the senate every 2 years (6 year terms is it).
They know where and when elections are going to take place, and each senator/congressman doesnt have a massive massive massive area to look after in comparison to the whole of america. Plus they have filing deadlines where the printers will know at some point before the elections, who is going to stand.
With the presidential elections, the two main parties dont actually technically nominate their candidates (even if runaway victors) until their national conventions, which still gives plenty of time.
With the UK the PM could call an election tomorrow (which would mean the election would be at least 6 weeks away) but then theres the whole you cant prepare for what you dont know will happen.
We have a parliamentary system while the Americans have a presidential system. THis is why the US President is elected independently of Congress, while our PM is not.
Both parliamentary and presidential systems have faults and strengths, and I wouldn't say that one is necessarily better than the other. The idea of directly electing the PM is interesting though. But what if the Conservatives win a parliamentary election and Labour win a PM election? Would both Labour and Conservative MPs be in the Cabinet?
I personally think that parliament should call elections and not the PM. And only when Parliament has decided when an election is called can the PM trot along to Buckingham Palace and tell Her Majesty.
How so?
Neil Kinnock accepted many aspects of Thatcherism. Besides, the ideology and values of the party have changed since then. Kinnock wasn't New labour, was he?
Do we have more debt? The national debt is not that high when compared with other major industrialised countries.
Seems like you're jealous. Only weak people are jealous.
Mind you, I doubt Macavity has forgiven Cable since making the jibe that Brown had made the "remarkable transformation in the last few weeks from Stalin to Mr Bean", so it would be unlikely to happen. Government of all the talents, my arse.
Personally I think a man who has acted as an exocet decoy and rescued badly burned Taffs from the Sir Galahad deserves our respect...
That doesn't seem a democracy - that seems an oligarchy where a small number make the decisions without fear or being thrown out. A working democracy needs political parties with differing positions - the exchange of ideas and debate needed turns out to be pretty good in the long run.
I agree. I don't want to waste my vote on a party like this - especially as we have no idea who the Founder members are. It could be Nick Griffin, for all we know.
By what stretch of the imagination is their education policy different? In fact, from what they've said so far, their education is built on the horrendous Labour academy policy. The policy that is great at getting parent's votes and gives out some nice statistics about "increasing" educational standards, but actually does very little to genuinely increase parental choice, increase overall standards, or free up teachers to do their job. All spin and no substance. No wonder the Conservatives are so keen.