This entry was posted on Friday, October 30th, 2009 at 13:24 and is filed under BUCF. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
BUCF
This is the Birmingham University Conservative Future
- B U C F
-------------------------- PRESIDENT - Sahar Rezazadeh VICE PRESIDENT - Daniel Cole 
BUCF Twitter- BU_CF: David explains our plans to reduce the burden of health and safety: David Cameron explains how the Conservatives wo... http://bit.ly/8eAi7y 01/12/2009
- BU_CF: Philip Hammond opens our consultation on Government IT: The Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury introduces the f... http://bit.ly/8TEeU1 01/12/2009
- BU_CF: David Cameron's message on World AIDS Day: David Cameron sends his thoughts and support to everyone who is affected... http://bit.ly/5JwFM4 30/11/2009
- BU_CF: Boris Johnson opens a new supermarket in South East London: Boris Johnson attends the opening of a supermarket in W... http://bit.ly/74w8Ez 26/11/2009
30/10/2009 at 13:25 |
I’ve just ran out of chocolate biscuits
30/10/2009 at 14:56 |
Urgh, Tony Blair…. not again!
11/11/2009 at 01:03 |
I knew all along I couldn’t hack this job.
13/11/2009 at 01:41 |
Hah, how’s about…
“Maybe, David, you could, for just a moment, stop trying to blame the entire global finance debacle on me and actually tell us exactly how this would be any better under a Conservative administration as opposed to spouting your unsubstantiated, and if I might add somewhat vague claims….”
or
“Oh Theresa, it’s not ‘Gordon Brown’s’ recession you childish wind-bag. If you hadn’t noticed it’s a deep-seated economic slump, most likely underpinned by the beginning of collapse of global oil production that is going to, ultimately, lead to a dramatic global depression and death due to the resulting food shortages… sorry, ‘Gordon Brown’s’ global depression and death due to the resulting food shortages because I personally ‘lost’ all the oil and hate humanity anyway…. yes it’s all my fault… laa laa laa”
or maybe just:
“… ‘the effect on personal and social responsibility of the recent growth of the state has promoted not social solidarity, but selfishness and individualism, and steadily squeezed out human kindness, generosity and imagination’??? We’re you actually alive during the last Conservative administration David? Or were you simply beamed down from a parallel universe where the ideology of all major political parties was somehow inversed??”
13/11/2009 at 19:39 |
Or perhaps:
“I guess you’re right, I should start taking some responsibility for the mess we are in. After all, I was the Chancellor and should have allocated funds sensibly…but tell everyone else that there’s a global deficit (?) and it’s the worlds fault, tell them to have sympathy for me. I promise to borrow more and spend more to make everyone happy again.”
15/11/2009 at 19:55 |
What’s a ‘global deficit’?
15/11/2009 at 22:04 |
New Labour wasteful spending= budget deficit.
Brown- “Global crisis”.
Global deficit? No.
:. Brown’s claims= fundamentally flawed.
17/11/2009 at 01:40 |
Well I was hoping that there would be at least one sentence on your response but I see that’s a bit too much to ask for. Spending does not equal a budget deficit, and there has indeed been a global crisis. The last ’sentence’ of your doesn’t even make any grammatical sense never mind economic sense.
17/11/2009 at 05:30 |
New Labour WASTEFUL spending=> budget deficit.
The recession=> Global crisis.
The budget deficit=> National crisis.
Global recession? Mostly yes.
Global deficit? Certainly not!
:. Brown cannot blame everything on the rest of the world.
BTW economy=> mathematical :. no need for use of poncey language and sentence structures.
17/11/2009 at 21:51 |
A budget deficit is not just a matter of spending.
You can’t divorce the size of the budget deficit from the issue of the global recession. If you have any solid suggestions for deficit reduction, I’d love to hear them.
Oh and BTW there’s nothing poncey about writing in sentences. You should give it a try sometime.
18/11/2009 at 01:35 |
Prevention is better than cure. Period.
18/11/2009 at 22:40 |
While Brown was reducing the debt burden, Tory shadow Chancellors were calling for tax cuts. What, in terms of borrowing, would these cuts have prevented?
18/11/2009 at 23:25 |
They may have prevented wasteful, irresponsible spending hence such elaborate borrowing would have been unnecessary.
Government should spend within its means.
19/11/2009 at 00:29 |
Actually I think you will find that tax revenues have slumped by more than double the recent increase in spending. I notice that you do nothing to address my question. Even if the tory sums had added up (which they never did) you would still be borrowing the same amount due to the fiscal stance being roughly the same.
I’m always interested to know which areas of government spending you have in mind. Could you elaborate with some precision please? And could you explain, prefferably in sentences, how tax cuts automatically lead to reductions in ‘wasteful spending’?
19/11/2009 at 02:20 |
This Labour Government has not been spending within its means. The fact that this spending spree has not improved public services means that it has been wasteful at the expense of the public.
Irresponsible of the government and unfair on the people.
19/11/2009 at 23:18 |
So you still can’t articulate which particular spending commitments you have in mind. And why did David Cameron at one point commit himself to those same spending commitments for the first few years. You still haven’t explained how the overall fiscal stance would be any different if we’d accepted the ideas touted on here.
21/11/2009 at 00:53 |
Whether David Cameron committed himself to anything at ‘one point’ is not really relevant for discussion. It’s his approach today that’s more appropriate to discuss.
If you find Laboour’s [poor] handling of the economy a better of two evils then that’s your decision. I can’t change your mind since it sounds like your mind has already been made.
Good banter though. :-)
26/11/2009 at 10:15 |
“Labour’s [poor] handling of the economy”, always wondered about that arguement. Well, was there a recession in Italy? Yes. USA? Yes. France? Yes. Germany? Yes. And the list goes on. So using “Tory economic logic” this recession meant one of 2 things. 1. Brown somehowed managed to cause a global recession, in which living in a globalised economy where the nation-state has increasingly little control or 2. That every single world leader is as “[poor]” as Brown. Of course, that’s not a populist chant is it?
27/11/2009 at 13:10 |
Who has now come out of recession? USA…yes, France… yes, Germany… yes, and the list goes on..! Global downturn yes, dire handling of our economy by Labour over the last 12 years! Most definitely. Spend spend spend has been the New Labour mantra since 1997, and so little has been achieved at the cost of so much. Leave your childish, ill-informed comments somewhere else
27/11/2009 at 13:37 |
“Leave your childish, ill-informed comments somewhere else”…well of course your not petty. Yes, and you seem to forget that the global recession has effected each national economy different, in the US they have unemployment 2% higher while in countries such as Japan and Germany theres been a massive wealth-crunch. This recession has been caused unaccountable banks which Osbourne, prior to the crisis, said there was 2 much regulation. Imagine the results if we had listened and you say “Spend spend spend”, but didn’t flip-flop Dave and Boy George actually support the emergency bail-out of the banks….for 10 days?
28/11/2009 at 15:28 |
Max,
I think you’re letting the government off a little too lightly. While I accept the culpability of city financiers, you can’t escape the fact that the regulatory authorities patently failed to recognise the exposure of British banks. The tripartite system that was established in 1997 is clearly unsatisfactory.
While this was indeed a global economic crisis, it’s nature has meant that the UK has been hit particularly hard. This impact could and should have been mitigated by the authorities.
28/11/2009 at 16:19 |
Of course it should have been but that’s all very well with the benefit of hindsight. If greater control had begun to be imposed, while it would not have been political suicide, it wouldn’t have been exactly popular and I know of one particular party at the time who would’ve opposed those measures at the time.
30/11/2009 at 17:42 |
Case closed