|
MistressJaynie -> RE: Dear Chief Secretary, there's no money left (5/17/2010 4:22:34 PM)
|
That Keynesian model was what Labour were advocating, of course, as the only sane fix; as were the Lib-Dems before their coalition re-think. Lab and Lib-Dem were both adamant severe cuts in 2010 would risk a double-dip recession. Clegg appears now to think otherwise, though nothing substantive has changed, one presumes. Coalition means compromise; and it's all about horse-trading. So no surprise he's trying to square a load of circles. Piggy in the middle isn't easy, but on this occasion it's taken him into no. 10, kind of. Clegg et al saw power on what ever basis. The rest was automatic, I'd guess.
I can't see how this will be a good thing for the Lib-Dems in the long-run. There'll be internecine, surely; and it'll end in tears before the five years. The Tories are already umming and arring about the 55% majority issue. Wait until there's some issue over Europe. The 1922ers haven't gone away, surely.
It'll be interesting, though, for all the worry.
Labour always spend; Tories always cut. Labour spent on things this country needed very badly. It was a muddle, through, and it never works as well as it should. So much is wasted in our society. It's sickening. But spending on what a society needs is better than the alternative. Tories tend not to think spending is as necessary because, bluntly, they often have other options, unlike the poor and uneducated. The Tories think their power is a form of natural varility; yet their advantages are based upon an unlevel playing-field skewed in their favour...from untaxed public schools to the natural advantages having family members in positions of power will bring. Many rebrand their success as if it is all self-made and individuated. Having a good start in life almost always means one does better. Having a bad start in life means one almost always does less well - often substantially and even fatally so. The poor are excluded from the best of society structurally and a priori, and some compensation for that is required.
The Tories' maxim that success is all about personal application is a disgusting myth. We do not live in a meritocrisy. Britain is riddled with nepotism and shady deals done on the nod. No party ever really solves these big issues. There's an immovable edifice in the UK; and once the bright young things get into power they see their idealism tempered by that reality.
Labour spent, and the crisis came along... not Labour's crisis, a world crisis. That's just a fact. The seeds of the buy now pay later mentality - of store-cards, credit-cards, 100% mortgages, crazy house-prices, of buy-to-let, and all that consumerist fantasy-land, which has left so many so prone now - were sown, tentatively, in the 1970s, but were developed into a cultural hegemony, under Thatcher, in the 1980s. The same is true of the turn in the UK from manufacturing to services. Blair came along, with his red flag of convenience, and knowing no-one having a great time on cheap credit wanted to hear anything as dowdy and unhip as perhaps do some saving for a rainy day, and just had to continue what Thatcherism had developed. The shit's firmly hit the fan, but it took more than 13 years of Labour rule, and it is more than the fault of that party, clearly.
There are personal issues to face, also. I never did get suckered into the free-for-all, and I'm doing ok because of that; though I'm saddened others are not, for whatever reason. But during that free-for-all, when others were spending like crazy and wondering why I wasn't, one pays a social price. It's swings and roundabouts, in essence.
Will there be riots, like in 1981?
J
|
|
|
|
