Taxi Driver Online

The best example was from David Copperfield when Mr Micawber said, 'Annual income £20, expenditure £19-19/6 equals happiness. Annual income £20 expenditure £20-0-6 equals misery.'

This government has borrowed more than the sum total of all previous governments since the battle of Hastings. [source BBC R4 Money Box 3/4/10] That is why no Labour supporter can ever lecture me on economics. The ideas of John Maynard Keynes required some thought and responsibility....Not just spend, spend spend. There was a formula to be followed in his multiplier theory which has been totally ignored by this government. Now we're in the [edited by admin] because they didn't have a clue about when to stop spending. I will never be able to retire because this shyster has totally decimated my pension.

Interesting article in the telegraph today on the previous socialist prime minister, tony blair. said to be worth about £60, 000, 000.
recently bought his second son nicky, a schoolteacher a home in london, for cash, reported to be £1,200,000.
seems to have a lot of business interest in.....

IRAQ!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, at least we now know why he was so keen to go to war....

_________________
Former taxi driver

Wasn't it Conservative defence cuts prior to 1982 which encouraged the Argies to invade? In fact isn't it true that had the Argies invaded a year later, the RN wouldn't have had any aircraft carriers left and consequently no task force with which to recover the islands?

I also don't remember honesty being paramount when the Belgrano was sunk outside the total exclusion zone...... in fact the cover up afterwards was anything but "honest"

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

The sinking of the Belgrano did exactly what it was designed to do keep the Argie Navy in port. Once it was sunk they never left Argentina.

What I can never understand, perhaps someone on here can enlighten me why is Labour so against anyone making a profit?

_________________
Life? Don't talk to me about life!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjm2eslm6hI

This morning’s Telegraph carries a story about a Centre for Policy Studies report warning that Labour’s wasteful record on defence spending risks denting public support for defence in the near future. Sadly this extends to politicians, too; when the next government (of whatever hue) casts around for things to cut, defence is undoubtedly going to be ripe for the axe thanks to the imminent £35bn of unfunded overspends on projects such as Typhoon and the new aircraft carriers.

Labour’s risible approach to defence procurement has seen money flow to Labour constituencies (CVF) and pointless European vanity projects (A400M and Typhoon) even as Geoff Hoon (and others) deliberately refused to provide the requisite body armour to the Army prior to the invasion of Iraq. The RAF has, arguably, seen the worst of Labour’s incompetence, with air-to-air capabilities designed to fight the Soviets supplanting the UAVs, reconnaissance aircraft and strike capabilites that everyone agrees are most likely to be needed in the future. The now almost unavoidable cuts to the size and capability of the RAF and Royal Navy – and, therefore, to our ability to project power on a global scale – are a direct consequence of Labour’s mismanagement and waste, not a peace dividend or a strategic shift in Britain’s global priorities.


HMS Hermes - could have been scuppered. Along with the Falklands.
So, what’s the damage? The Royal Navy will probably lose one or both of its future aircraft carriers (along with a sub or three), and the RAF will end up smaller and weaker in terms of its offensive capabilities. While we flounder in Afghanistan the public’s indulgence will not extend to unforseeable future conflicts: insurance policies, no matter how vital, tend not to be high on voters’ lists of spending priorities, especially when a bloody ground war is in such sharp focus. There is, however, a lesson to be learned from history here – had John Nott’s proposed defence cuts gone through before 1982, we’d have had no aircraft carriers and Port Stanley would probably be under an Argentine flag today.

Of course, the Army – which does the bulk of the work in Afghanistan – must be protected from the axe. But, as Sierra Leone, Iraq and the Falklands showed, seapower and airpower are also vital parts of Britain’s ability to project power. We lose those capabilities at the risk of losing our ability to influence world affairs. A switch to commercial off-the-shelf procurement – though long overdue – can do little now to prevent cuts and guard against strategic shocks. When those shocks happen – and they will – it will be down to Labour’s waste that we lack the ability to fight back. Is there a more shameful legacy than that?

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

I don't trust the Tories as far as I could throw a stone.

Interest rates will rise (great if you have a low mortgage or no mortgage at all, or a few bob in the bank)

Higher taxes for the working classes, plus lower taxes for the well off. ( I have no doubt that the 50% tax for the well off will be axed after a few months of tory rule, should they be elected).

The Tories attack labour on youth unemployment yet are planning to cut funding for youth training and apprenticeship schemes.

They attack on the gap between rich and poor and will cut inheritance tax for the rich.

They attack on the running of the economy but plan to cut investment in the public sector very severely which will only increase unmemployment.

They attack on the how labour handling of the banks yet the tories for short term gains plan to sell those shares on the cheap. Guess who will snap most of them up?

They claim they will get people on incapacity benefit back into work, the truth is they will just unconditionally cut their income and leave them to rot after that.

If I was a multi miilionaire who owned tons of land yep I want the tories in power. I cant think of what they will do for the average working class?

Maybe if Nulab Didnt Let Tom, Dick and Harpreet into the country then half the Nulab doctored figures showing the long term unemployed as on Incapacity benefits wouldnt be needed as most of these Jobless Brits would be able to find work.

As for millionaires..well..they get their money through running successfull businesses that employ lots of people...these people also pay taxes and pay for all the present governments waste.

Sorry....but the Old Labourite voters thinking of the 60s,70, and early 80s is more class driven than realistic..its the Old "My father Voted Labour and so will I" approach than anything else.

FFs...13 years theyve had to sort things and all theyve done is saddle each and everyone one of us with tens of thousands of pounds of debt!!!

Would you Hold the nail for 13 years for the same guy weilding the hammer and who always Missed the nail and hits your thumb every day of those past 13 years....Some folk just dont learn from experience it seems...

The Conservative Risk – Education and Skills


The Conservatives would:
•Spend less than Labour overall and won’t guarantee to protect frontline school budgets or Sure Start
•Cut billions from existing schools to pay for their plan to copy Swedish school reforms which failed to raise standards
•Introduce plans which could see schools being opened in pre-fabricated buildings, or in rented office blocks without playing fields
•Not support Labour’s guarantees of one-to-one catch up support to stop children falling behind and full information on a school’s performance for parents
•Not support our aim to get 50% of young people into university or match our guarantee to help all young people fulfil their talents with a place in training, education or an apprenticeship to the age of 18.


In taking the tough decisions necessary to halve the deficit in the next parliament Labour is nevertheless determined to keep front line school budgets, 16 to 19 year old training education, and Sure Start protected from cuts so that standards can keep rising. The Conservatives won’t make this guarantee to schools and Sure Start and make clear they intend to cut overall spending faster than Labour threatening the recovery.

The Conservatives would take billions of pounds from existing schools to fund extra school places and their centralised “Pupil Premium” could see huge cuts of over 10% to hundreds of schools. Their plans are based on Swedish reforms which increased costs overall – meaning less money for existing schools.

And they have opposed our guarantees to parents including one-to-one tuition for children falling behind; more information for parents on how local schools are doing through new School Report Cards; and tough Home School Agreements to enforce good discipline



Schools
Swedish-style reforms
The Conservatives would copy school reforms implemented in Sweden in the 1990s. These reforms would involve creating hundreds of thousands of new school places without regard to where there are already surplus places.

They would make this reform whilst making cuts to overall school budgets. In order to deliver the cost of building the extra schools the Conservatives promise they have already confirmed they would need to cut hundreds of planned school building projects.

But in addition, as seen in Sweden, these reforms have also led to a significant increase in running costs. Given the Conservatives’ plans for frontline school cuts these costs will have to come at the expense of existing schools which would put at risk the improvements in standards we have seen for the majority.

Alongside this the Conservatives plan to centralise school funding and impose a national “pupil premium”, which the institute for Fiscal Studies has pointed out could lead to cuts of over 10 per cent to schools’ budgets.

In order to try to make the sums add up the Conservatives would cut back on the minimum requirements for school facilities and change the planning laws so that schools could be built in inappropriate buildings like rented office blocks or pre-fabricated buildings without adequate sports facilities.

The Conservatives would also scrap the national curriculum for their new schools and water down the expectation on schools to appoint properly trained teachers. Use of unqualified teachers in similar schools in Sweden is considerably higher than in mainstream schools. Furthermore, in Sweden, despite Conservative claims, these types of new schools have been shown to have failed to improve standards, as shown in a detailed report by the Swedish National Agency for Schools.



Refusing to support Guarantees of Standards for all
Whilst proposing risky reforms for a few which will mean cuts for the many the Conservatives have also refused to back Labour’s minimum guarantees of a good education to all. They oppose our parent and pupil guarantees which include parents’ right to detailed information on their child’s school performance to help make an informed choice about schooling – and the guarantees of one to one or small group work for children who need help to achieve their best. The Conservatives have also made clear that they would not intervene if standards slipped in their new Swedish style schools saying that “the very nature“ of their reforms “means it would be optional” (Conservative spokesperson, Times Educational Supplement, 1st May 2009) letting schools drift and failing to get the best out of every child,



Denying young people real opportunities
The Conservatives would repeat the mistakes of the recession of the 1980s and 1990s when a generation of young people were left on the scrap heap. They have opposed the funding for Labour’s guarantees of a place in work, training, an apprenticeship or education for all 18-24 year olds who have been unemployed for six months or more. They won’t back the funding for our guarantee of a place in training or education for young people leaving school at 16 or 17(Source: Michael Gove,BBC Radio 4 WATO, Monday, 15 June 2009). Fewer young people could have the chance to go to university since the Tories would abandon the national goal of getting half of young people into Higher Education.

The Conservatives would scrap Train to Gain, Labour’s in work training programme which helps employers and employees to improve their skills to help them face the challenge of the new economy. Train to Gain has given over 450,000 people the chance to qualify at GCSE level or equivalent. Overall it has worked with over 143,000 employers and helped 1.2 million people to start a course.

_________________
Mick Hildreth (07814 032002)
GMB PDB P39 Southern Region Branch Secretary
mick.hildreth@gmbtaxis.org.uk
www.gmbpdb.org.uk

Who's Propoganda stuff is this I wonder..???..... if its so good why is there more unemployed and not less??


It would appear the word reform if used by the Tories is a bad thing...however, 13 years of nulab reform has made us the envy of the modern world....nottttttttttt!!!!!

Our standing in the world is at an all time low.

Anecdotally, a swedish national told me on Friday that their press is saying we're next for the bailout after Greece. Do I hear echoes of Denis Healey and the IMF from 1976?

BB's posts are so perfectly written, I'm wondering if they are from a manual of Labour propoganda that they all have to carry with them. Once again, stifling individual thought and flair to make sure they all toe the party line.

I thought this forum was where the members expressed their points of view.. it's a pity that all BB can do is cut-and-paste the Spin provided by the Labour Party..... if the Government were to bring down the tax rate on the rich.... maybe some of the company's would come back into England.... that might mean more jobs... and taxes going into the coffers of this country instead of somebody else's.... 25 per cent of something is a lot better than 100 per cent of nothing..... The true Tories will always vote for Labour because Labour's policy is to spend spend and spend.....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

How about some proper incentive to purchase wheelchair access vehicles?

Let us run on red diesal and have wheelchair access cabs with no vat.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Miss out the Middle man....Invent a Diesel wheelchair