English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

As Chancellor, GORDON BROWN has:-
Handed the power to control our economy to non-elected bankers (control of interest rates), creating the most debt ridden society ever, in the history of Britain.
Increased overall taxation to extortionate levels (up 80%).
Used underhand methods of taxation (stealth taxes).
Raided the pension funds of millions of workers.
Penalised married couples by removing their married tax allowance.
Supported Blair’s Iraq debacle (which has resulted in thousands of deaths, and wasted billions of pounds of taxpayer's money), Supported all the other disastrous Blairite policies.
With a record like his, surely he deserves to be booted out of office, not given the job of Prime Minister?

2007-01-16 07:46:21 · 20 answers · asked by A.M.D.G 6 in News & Events Current Events

RamboBlan... Sorry to disagree, but Gordon Brown had no right to hand control of OUR economy to the Bank of England. Bankers make money by lending money, so it is utter madness to allow them to control the conditions for lending money. If you understand how the banking system works you will realise that banks have a virtual licence to print money, inasmuch as they lend around eleven times the amount that investors deposit in their accounts. So most of the money they lend out exists only as a ledger entry which is deleted as the debt is repaid, so it is in reality non-existent money on which they collect interest. Obviously, this system can inflate the economy, as every loan creates a temporary increase in the money supply. To permit banks to encourage borrowing to the record levels we have now reached is a madness which has put the entire economy at risk.

2007-01-23 07:44:03 · update #1

The only meaningful controls left to the Chancellor which can act as a brake on the inflationary pressures caused by this unfettered lending, are: raising taxes, (which Gordon Brown has done with a vengence),
allowing masses of cheap imports from worker exploititive and dirt poor economies (which has also happened),
increasing the numbers of non-productive, public sector workers to offset unemployment (which Gordon Brown has also done).
None of these things are good for the long term health of the British economy. and the signs of this mismanagement are beginning to show.

2007-01-23 07:56:59 · update #2

20 answers

I have no doubt Gordon Brown will be exposed for what he is. This country has more debt now than ever before in our history and he and his cronies will continue to cover the facts for as long as they can.. That is why they are so desperate to stay in power. It is also the reason Brown and Blair pretend to be such good mates; it is all part of their cover up.
They do not really like each other and never have!

2007-01-21 04:20:16 · answer #1 · answered by Whistler R 5 · 1 0

I would only take issue with your first point. The Bank of England have been given the responsibility for keeping inflation under control with interest rates. We live in a debt ridden society because we live in a must have now pay later society. In the past the Chancelor controlled interest rates and tended to change them for political reasons rather than economic reasons, e.g rates would come down before a General Election and we would all have more money to spend and think what a splendid Government we have got. By giving the power to the B of E he made a wise and courageous move. Should Gordon Brown be the next Prime Minister? I cannot see a better alternative from any political party.

2007-01-21 23:01:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because he and Tony Blair made a pact. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown made a gentleman's agreement after the death of Labour leader John Smith in 1994.
Supposedly, The pact has two parts; the first being that Gordon Brown would not stand in the Labour Party leadership election, effectively giving Blair a clear run, and letting him lead the Labour Party in the 1997 general election. The second part of the pact was that if Blair acquired the job of Prime Minister, he would stay in the job for an agreed period of time. He would then resign and hand the job over to Brown.
It is commonly believed that the 'deal' was agreed at the now-defunct Granita restaurant in Islington, London. This too has been debated.
In 2003, columnist Tom Brown told the BBC that Gordon Brown had informed him of the 'deal', nine years previously though stories relating to the event had circulated before.
In June 2003, The Guardian newspaper published a copy of a note that apparently confirms the existence of a pre-leadership-contest agreement between Blair and Brown, with Brown standing aside in favour of Blair in return for the pursuit of a 'fairness (i.e. socialist) agenda' under a Labour government.
Blair's supporters deny such a deal ever existed.

2007-01-16 09:07:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Dude we are british it's the effort that counts not the achievement and he's tried really hard. Like Eddie "the eagle" Edwards and Wayne Rooney.

What chancellor ever improved our economy in the last 25 years? They have all been useless and he is by no means the worst of them.

I have no one to vote for I am a genuine Labour boy so I don't care.

I think we had the opportunity under Blair and Brown to address the home issues. To improve the NHS and Re-nationalise our utility industry. The balance between the rich and poor has increased under labour and recreated the class system with the working class barely able to afford a house and totally demotivated.

I really don't care who is prime minister anymore i'd be happier if Portilo was in charge at least he'd sort some of our "problems" out.

2007-01-16 07:58:06 · answer #4 · answered by Bohdisatva 3 · 1 1

I don't think its democratic to force Brown onto the country, if the current PM wants to step down I think we should have a general election or at very worst a say in the person who assumes the role. Maybe if Brown is as bad as you list then he actually does deserve to lead this wrecked country!!

2007-01-16 20:43:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

He doesn't deserve to be Prime minister, nor does blair, not sure about Cameron but he is making the right noises, this government has made me more extreme, I may vote UKIP to get back control of our borders, make our own laws again, scrap the human rights act.

2007-01-16 08:01:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

if he is he wont be in no10 too long as this crowd cant possibly be voted in again with all the balls ups and now this home office pantomime so lets get rid of some of these civil servants they are plainly not up to their jobs or else supervision is not existant

2007-01-16 07:58:37 · answer #7 · answered by srracvuee 7 · 2 0

In Italy they have the Mafia but unfortunately here there is only Gordon Brown.Not much difference.

2007-01-19 03:59:16 · answer #8 · answered by james j 2 · 1 0

because he has been tony blair's no. 2 for 10 years

2007-01-16 07:51:14 · answer #9 · answered by liam0_m 5 · 1 0

Over inflated ego and megalomania,just like tony.

2007-01-16 08:03:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers