so how come the gap between rich and poor has incereased under labour? Can't blame anyone else for that.

At least maggie knew how to win a war (and a legal one at that) god bless her!

Ha Ha here we go!

I think its pretty much the whole bloodly lot of them , so dissociated and out of touch with the majority of the Country, can pretty much gaurantee that none of them really care and our only interested in the money the perks the tilte. But then people still vote now im not saying we need some idiot in charge from down someones local boozer , but i really do think that if there was a figure more closely assosiated with the majority of the Country then i think that could make a diferent one perspon alone of course will make no differnce, and infact i really doubt who ever comes into power will actually make that many changes, Now most wouldnt risk being seen to be differnt, inovative etc, Prob down to the fact that they may be seen as Un P.C . Its gone bloody mad really here over the last decade or so. From Education, Religion ,. P.C. Police , your own human rights, Most importantly familie values, Until all these things are addressed then i really cant saee a change in our Country as a whole , which is a shame. Fuck em all start your own.

Are you being serious?
The boom of this country started in 2001 of which labour was in power
LABOUR HAS BEEN IN POWER SINCE 1997

Conservatives did not start this.

My bit of advice to save this country is simple: buy the daily mail 21 billion is currently given to housing benefit. how about we re-house the one's in london and any other areas in the uk where renting is expensive and more them in areas around the country which are cheaper and save some ££££ or better still but is not possible dont pay nothing at all.

The gap between rich and poor has increased because Labour are looking after the wealthy...? I doubt it. Probably more due to the fact that wealth distribution was uneven to begin with. Remember, there is a 50% tax on bankers coming up and that ain't the poor being penalised.

Also bear in mind it was a certain Mr Bush Jr that wanted the war and not Mr Blair. No offence to any US members but I think we all agree that Mr Bush Jr is not the sharpest stick in the woods and to this very day I don't understand why anyone would have voted for him to be in power (twice)

Agree with that too, Bush what a joker

i know, twice

True to a point, although I'm sure the state of the country can be traced back ad nauseum.

Thatcher was however responsible for the implimentation of the theories of milton freidman which has had a far bigger effect on where we are now than anything any government has done before or since. (Friedman was a radical right wing economist who advocated out and out capitalism including the selling off of national assets i.e. gas, electricity etc etc, he was responsible for this in chile in conjunction with pinochet (thatcher's best mate) and several other south american countries with help from the americans and us as part of test cases before Thatcher used his ideas here).

Thatcher advocated home ownership, the biggest con ever pulled on the british people, there's nothing quite so dibilitating as debt. Who can afford to go on strike with a 200k debt over their head.

Whoever gets in, it really makes very little difference, we're in a sad state now where the differences between parties are very slight, there are few clear cut policies because all parties pander to public opinion instead of sticking to their traditional party views.

on another note, and this has been doing my head in for a few weeks, are we still at war in iraq? what happened there? did we win or did we slink out the back door and nobody (including the press) said anything? it's incredible that one minute we were at war and the next minute nothing.

for far better insights on what really happens in the world check out:

naomi klein's - shock doctrine
Zeitgeist and zeitgeist addendum
noam chomsky's manufacturing consent

Mr Blair certainly wanted war... he loved it, a Christian who adores violence.

He recently admitted even without the weapons of mass destruction lie he would have gone for a regime change in Iraq (completely illegal under international law)... so much for new labour.

Britain gets yanked up by the balls, and the sick man of Europe is slowly mended only for Bill and Ben to do their utmost to bring us to our knees again

Some people do ok off it:

MEET the mum and dad with an incredible FOURTEEN kids who prove Britain's benefits system has gone bonkers - showering them with a whopping tax-free £36,847 a year in handouts.
Pregnant Dawn and Sean Cain's huge family - aged from 21 down to 19 months - have just enjoyed a very merry Christmas, with every mouthful of their turkey dinner, and every present stuffed under their tree, paid for by YOU the taxpayer.

To match their breathtaking haul from the public purse Sean (pictured above with family) would have to clinch a job paying a gross salary of £51,500 - a near impossibility in this recession.
Our list of jobs below shows how Britain's crazy system values courage, dedication and hard graft - paying front-line soldiers in Afghanistan just £22,000 and junior NHS doctors £33,285.

And although Mr Cain is able, he's definitely not willing. He and wife Dawn admit their New Year's resolution is never to find work, because no job they'd get in Britain's recession-hit economy will come close to paying the same. They're sticking with the gift that just keeps on giving - benefits.
And unlike most of Britain's workforce they're in for a PAYRISE - as Dawn expects child No 15 in April.
One-time landscape gardener Sean admitted: "With the social giving us £700 a week why should I work for anything less? There's no point me even trying to look for a job. I've got a family of 15 to support.
"I'm better off staying at home and helping Dawn with the kids.
"People could call us scroungers but what would they do in the same situation?" The Cains' situation just spotlights the country's barmy benefits bonanza.

First the family get the RENT paid on their home in Wythenshawe, Manchester. They don't pay their £1,023-a-year COUNCIL TAX bill either.
They get CHILD TAX CREDITS of £439 a week, CHILD BENEFIT of £138 a week and eight of the kids enjoy FREE SCHOOL DINNERS worth £48 a week.
Despite vowing not to work, 41-year-old Sean gets JOBSEEKER'S ALLOWANCE of £150 every fortnight.
It all adds up to that £36,847 grand total which dwarfs the take-home pay of millions of hardworking families. Britain's average salary is £21,320 before tax and national insurance.
Dawn, 39, has never worked since she became a mum at the age of 18. And Sean hasn't lifted a finger since 2003 when he took time off to help Dawn handle a problem with the kids. He soon realised he was better off on benefits and has stayed home ever since.
Research director of the Taxpayers' Alliance Matthew Sinclair blamed the scandal on the system. He said: "All those complicated benefits often add up to so much it's not worth working. It's absolutely shocking."
We get £700 a week on the social. Why work for less? There's no point looking for a job
Dawn says she only planned for six kids but then felt obliged to carry on in a state-funded bid to become the perfect mum.
She said: "Whenever I have a baby I always think, 'I'm not having any more!' But then I get this urge to have another because I want to do it better."
Dawn, who smokes 20 cigarettes a day, added: "I'm a good mum. I breastfed them all and with each one I learn a bit more, so I think, 'Well why not have another one?'
"People expect us to be scruffy and dirty because we're such a big family, but we're not. I look after my kids well and make sure we get by. And every Christmas I make sure they get everything they want."
With a bit of help from the taxpayer.

This year we funded a huge £2,000 gift list including mobile phones, bikes, scooters, a camcorder, hair straighteners and a Wii games console for Dawn's brood.
She insisted: "I don't want them to miss out on what other kids have got. If they ask for a mobile, I'll get them one."
And the money-spinning family tradition looks all set to continue - for her 19-year-old daughter Katie has already made Dawn a grandma by giving birth to a son 18 months ago.
Katie said: "I love being a mum but I don't want as many kids as my mum. I've said I'll stop at three."
_______
HANDOUT BRITAIN
The Cain family's benfits bonanza:
SCHOOL DINNERS Free for 8 kids: £1,920 a year
FREE COUNCIL TAX £1,023 a year
CHILD TAX CREDITS £22,828 a year
CHILD BENEFIT £7,176 a year
JOBSEEKER'S ALLOWANCE £3,900 a year
GRAND TOTAL £36,847 a year or £708 a week
GROSS SALARY YOU WOULD NEED TO MATCH IT £51,500 a year


Merry Christmas everybody and keep working hard
the McCains need you.

Exactly, no body minds paying tax, you have to pay into the system to funds hospitals and schools but to be given the news that tax has to be risen because we're got no money to fund all the ones in local housing is a joke.
The more money you earn, the more you discourage paying it, there is a large hole which if labour had its way would be getting filled and filled and filled and it would never become full.
Look at mr green, owner of topshop etc, with his wife taking full control of the business he saved £285million in taxes for 2009. I know buying boats at 40/50million is stupid and planes at 20-30million is crazy but i would rather have the pleasure of them luxuries than give it to them donkeys in power who would technically piss it up the wall.

and Giro's are so last decade

I agree, but Tony was hardly dragged in to it kicking and screaming was he?

why is it the wealthy are devoid of a social conscience ?

(just for Mike - yes i agree broad sweeping statement and not meant to hurt any kind hearted wealthier than the average person, I just get exasparated at the viewpoint that the wealthier should not be be taxed proportionately more)

very good posts simonf (on the scandanavian model - i tend to agree) and notworthit