Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Labour Says Workers Thousands Of Pounds Worse Off

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23580075

The average worker will lose a total of £6,600 in real terms during the coalition's term in government, the Labour Party says.

It is accusing David Cameron of having presided over more months of falling real wages since 2010 than any other prime minister in the past 50 years.

Based on its prediction, Labour said many workers had "never had it so bad".

If only they could have kept the boom going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour, the worse UK government in living memory ruled for 13 years, a lost decade of war, corruption, scandal, tax and spend, destruction of whole communities through obscene immigration levels, driving down wages the pure waste and banking excess... & now they have a conscience or concern for real working people? Don t make me laugh. :angry:

Labour wants you to vote for them and drink the Kool Aid...

Edited by JustAnotherProle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the principal battleground on which campaign strategists now believe the election will be fought: living standards.

With the economy apparently picking up and Osborne playing the well-worn debt/house prices card to create a consumer feelgood buzz, Labour now believe that they're in danger of losing the austerity argument and the focus should therefore switch to falling real incomes and wealth inequality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the principal battleground on which campaign strategists now believe the election will be fought: living standards.

With the economy apparently picking up and Osborne playing the well-worn debt/house prices card to create a consumer feelgood buzz, Labour now believe that they're in danger of losing the austerity argument and the focus should therefore switch to falling real incomes and wealth inequality.

True, but the "falling real incomes" card is a pretty weak one. Labour politician stands up and says "Workers of Britain, you are getting poorer!" Workers reply "Well done for noticing, that means we should vote for you because...?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the principal battleground on which campaign strategists now believe the election will be fought: living standards.

With the economy apparently picking up and Osborne playing the well-worn debt/house prices card to create a consumer feelgood buzz, Labour now believe that they're in danger of losing the austerity argument and the focus should therefore switch to falling real incomes and wealth inequality.

But even the Tories have stopped talking about austerity (as some of us predicted would be the case). The rhetoric now is all about 'new' growth. And surely Labour can't have been surprised by Osborne's pre-election HPI ramp, my guess is it's the exact approach they'd have used themselves!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but the "falling real incomes" card is a pretty weak one. Labour politician stands up and says "Workers of Britain, you are getting poorer!" Workers reply "Well done for noticing, that means we should vote for you because...?"

Because of this

"Labour economic record clean bill of health"

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/aug/04/labour-economic-record-clean-bill-of-health

Read it and weep (tears of laughter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, since we like the facts rather than the spin on this site, could you point out where it's wrong?

Lew has now taken up the baton from Gordon Brown when it comes to politicians who understand the nature of the huge deficiency of demand in the world economy. People go on about the need for supply-side policies, but the fact is that there is no shortage of supply, but of demand, which continues to be constrained by the vogue for totally unnecessary and hugely destructive policies of austerity.

Nothing that zero hour contracts, falling earnings and restoking a house price bubble can't fix I'm sure.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, since we like the facts rather than the spin on this site, could you point out where it's wrong?

You mean the facts for the millions of people in the UK?

Who after 13 years of excellent economic stewardship, owed more money than ever before, had taken part in mass financial fraud, had worse job prospects, couldn't afford to put a roof over their heads and were generally becoming more and more unequal with those in charge?

The proof of the pudding is in our lives, not the account ledgers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Migration policy was all about skewing elections and wages levels. Central to labour policy. The irony is that those who vote labour are the ones most lilkely to have suffered as a result. that the current incumbents are no different is a double blow to living standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the facts for the millions of people in the UK?

Who after 13 years of excellent economic stewardship, owed more money than ever before, had taken part in mass financial fraud, had worse job prospects, couldn't afford to put a roof over their heads and were generally becoming more and more unequal with those in charge?

The proof of the pudding is in our lives, not the account ledgers.

Well, it's true that Labour should have been much more aggressive in regulating the banks and putting brakes on the flow of credit to the housing market, and should have made sure that where credit did go in, in went into new home construction.

Indeed, where labour got it wrong was in being too lassiez-faire.

So, how's Osbourne dealing with the problems?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Migration policy was all about skewing elections and wages levels. Central to labour policy. The irony is that those who vote labour are the ones most lilkely to have suffered as a result. that the current incumbents are no different is a double blow to living standards.

Migration policy, bank deregulation, NHS quasi-privatisation, PFI, etc.. all of these things stem from the excessive influence of big business and the banks on the government. They want cheap labour, the freedom to fleece and lots of juicy government contracts.

Which is why you'll have noticed very little change indeed under osbourne. Just slightly nastier to the workers and slightly nicer to the rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's clearly doing more of the same.

To endorse the Labour record is to endorse Ozzie

Indeed.

This may cause a dilemma on polling day. I'm betting 650 dead heats, turnout 0.000000000%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can workers be worse off but house prices higher?

Answers on a postcard...

The low loader is stuck on the level crossing, the lights are flashing, the barriers are about to come down but the train is still round the corner...

Different workers - that is the danger of using averages, it is those in the top 10-15% doing the buying at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem the main parties have is as follows (in my view):

Cons- They have not seriously attempted to tackle Govt. finances. Now their 'rescue to recovery' narrative looks ridiculous since there are still huge problems they have never attempted to address but which undermine their message that 'things are getting better' when for most people they blatantly are not.

Lab- Still can't credibly criticise Cons given their unwillingness to be open about their previous economic madness. Their more spending mantra looks laughable given Osborne is Brown II. All they need to do is keep quiet though and they'll have it in the bag though. Surprised to see them attacking the Govt. now rather than as close to polling day as possible.

LibDems- Burned by being happy to shelve manifesto in return for power sharing. An inevitable spanking awaits. Plenty of floaters went LD after the TV debates, and seems hard to imagine many will do so again. Plenty of core support will surely go Labour too. Hard to imagine that any other than the safest of seats will be held.

If living standards are the next electoral battleground, none have any credible means of criticising the others without debunking their own positions.

Edited by cheeznbreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   205 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.