QUOTE (Ozzy @ Nov 1 2010, 12:51 PM)
Ah but you're doing the exact same thing now. Tit bits.
Exact same what? What I said is true. Labour had created a system that they couldn't pay for, without borrowing. That in itself is short-termism and just as mean as what the ConDems are doing now, in my view.
QUOTE (Ozzy @ Nov 1 2010, 12:51 PM)
It swings in roundabouts. Even if they were borrowing more despite the bank bail-out, Darling and Brown's bank plan itself did work so that sort of balances the positive and negative. You could go through all the decisions like that.
But this thread is about the economy. You can't blame people for the state of the economy if they were not in charge. You can speculate, but it happened on Labour's watch.
QUOTE (Ozzy @ Nov 1 2010, 12:51 PM)
Take Iraq as an example. Wind back to 2003 and put Cameron in charge. Put the same evidence on the table. Would the Tories have made the same decision? Probably. I don't think they would have not backed the US. I don't think they would have not wanted to have claim to some of that oil.
Difficult decisions come along and people in power make those decisions. Rightly or wrongly those decisions are taken on the best evidence made available and those in power take the decisions to the best of their ability at the time.
Labour got a few wrong and a few right. I'm sure the Tories will do the same.
If in 10 years time you can't find something to heavily criticise the Conservatives on then i'll be amazed.
So would I and I agree, but this thread is about the economy, not those things you list.