Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Fred - Stick a mop up your arse and wash your brain!

No Fred, you are bending the answer. :-)) We all know there is a problem but Mr A lexander sits on the fence and does not answer a question put to him. Some of the qustions were directed at today, not the future. We are left guessing as like many times with the labour party do they infact have any answers or direction. How can Labour keep being so critical of the Cons when they seem never to tell us what they would do in the position. Alexander to me did not do the Labour party any favours this morning. By all means Labour criticize the Cons but please tell us how you would do things better and above all answer the question put to you by the news reader.

DC - this is the lovely thing about being in opposition; you can be as critical as you like about the incumbent, but can always use the excuse that (say) until you get back into power, you cannot possibly see the sort of mess inherited ..... specific answers are never forthcoming and constructive, useful and properly costed suggestions or alternatives almost as rare

I know what you are saying cynic, you have to question why bother turning up for the interview. I hope they tell us their plans on the run up to future election. I'm all for an honest politician. Going back to the interview this morning Douglas Alexander
only had to say is as of today blah, blah and so on. Don't use the excuse all the time that we do not know what the Cons will leave us to inherit in the future. HONESTY, HONESTY thats all we ask or perhaps to much to ask.

as so often in life, you need to listen to what is NOT said

cynic , those car cleaners would have to clean 17 cars ever day 365 days a year
and then would still not earn enough to pay tax and that is chargeing £ 10 a car
and in a small town i think not .
so they pay no tax no insurance and claim benefits and free health
no benefit to the uk they cost the tax payers money .
6 men cleaning cars .allow over 9k before paying tax
if they charge a £r then double it to 34 cars aday
cynic your post was a lie

so you know this as an absolute fact do you?
what's your maths like, as i reckon 17 x £10.00 x 365 = £62,050?


of course you still haven't answered the questions i raised, but then you are incapable of doing other than ranting from your soapbox and showing yourself to be the total pratt you clearly are.

what about all those asian girls you said bred like rabbits so they could live off the state?
have you abandoned that load of nonsense now?

Yes you come acroos what is not said enough in life.

To much guess work going on, no back up with hard facts.

Davai,

Auntie Maggie destroyed the UK industrial base and replaced it with the Financial services. (Flies on the back of others.)

Pumping or pimping money to the "poorer" nations is an attempt to, or hope that it will return favours by "buying" future "products or produce" and influence.
(Whether it does so, or not, is debateable.)

==========
Dreams,

As far as policies are concerned it is obvious that the tories have no definable ongoing policies which are not reversed, cancelled, or changed with moments of them being pronounced.

Cameron is a windbag with little substance and whose policies are based on and consist of the use of universal quantifiers, presumptions, Non sequitors and unspecified referential parameters and rely on ambiguity.

He is even a poor PR man and would make an even poorer second hand car dealer.

-----

Cynic,

I agree with you to a degree, it is easy to be critical of the present government, but would you buy a business, or a second hand car of this “lot”, without knowing what is on the book on under the bonnet, two years ahead of any deals.

I was challenged when I was younger in a similar way and replied that "I would not allow myself to be bound to future undecided decisions".

do you mean like facts about JIMMY SAVILE when the people were hiding the truth
to protect the bbc and the gov and the top civil servants and the pop world

i'ld certainly rather buy a car from this bunch that from those on the bench opposite - whereas you would clearly be the reverse

as for Margaret Thatcher, the country should be every bit as glad that she turned up when she did, as did Churchill in 1939/1940 ..... demolishing the power of the unions such as the NUM was one of the very best thing she ever did

tanker has clearly abandoned his attack on young asian girls and even the rest of his nonsense about polish workers.

of course, he hasn't even pretended to answer the questions i raised initially

policies, I understand to mean plans of action. Fred Labour have non or perhaps they are so good we cannot be told. You have to tell the electorate your policies otherwise they are left guessing as to you have non or are indeed making them up as you go. :-))

Cynic,

I wouldn't buy a car off either side.

Churchill was a good orator, which served him and Britain well, but as a strategic planner raised quite a few problems.

He was good in parts, but had a chequered past.

----------

Maggie period in "office", is probably responsible for many of the problems we have in our economy and society today.

(Not blind to some of useful actions.)

Even Macmillan, thought she squandered the "family" silver to line the pockets of the "party faithful".

Also, responsible for the "statements" leading to MPs thinking it OK to fiddle their expenses.

-----------------

I don't believe you Fred you leave me speechless. lol "family" silver, I won't go there, after all Gordon never sold our gold off, that was a dream I'm sure.

fred - we'll just agree to differ ...... churchill was clearly the right man at the right time ..... macmillan was an excellent statesman of the old patrician breed, but he certainly lacked the sort of backbone and fire that thatcher brought to the task ..... had the likes of the NUM and other unions been left to their evil scheming (and i mean that too), then i think the damage would have been totally irreparable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7139265.stm

The above is a reminder of why a vote on the EU is needed.

Cynic,

Perhaps, a more sensible PM than Thatcher would not have confronted the unions in the same way.

She appealed to the middle right, right and blue rinsed torie brigade and those who financed her and wished to retreat to them and us.

Some thought of her as bloody minded, I concur with them.

Cameron is acting as poor "imitation" of her trying to call her "boys" (troops) over the top to be slaughtered.

(They may be at the next election.)


It appeared to me, at the time, that Scargill and Thatcher were as stupid as each other and deserved one another.

The country didn't!

Would suggest that you read some non-sycophantic history of Churchill, also re-read what I posted.
-----------

Dreams,

Suggest you have a look at the reasoning for the sell-off of gold by the UK and many other countries.

Timing could have been better.
=======

Do you want to go back to the gold standard monetary system?

I think you even know that the sale of the gold cost the country a small fortune.