"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 24/01/2020 13:45:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Ray wrote:
You'll next be telling us what a success universal credit has
been -
for those receiving it. And how NHS waiting times have come down.

Those are irrelevant to your stupid lie that the Tories have moved
to
the right

I take it you think cutting benefits

That¼s a lie.

I do realise you are a right winger, but do you have to be like Trump
and
say the truth is a lie?

Just the tiniest bit of research - other than in the Express - would
soon
tell you about the effects of universal credit.

I don't think many can justify the 5 week automatic delay in receipt of
Tax Credits, nor the administrative delays in receiving housing costs,
unless they're a sadist.

You could actually answer the reference, "And are you seriously trying
to claim that Blair and Brown didn¼t do any move to the right ?" rather
than calling it a lie.

You might look at the bits I was replying to in order.

Most would consider Blair to be more right wing than thatcher,

Most as in you?

he
privatised assets Thatcher didn't want to.

Thatcher 'privatized' thing for her own political advantage.


I could go on with PPPs.

Think most conveniently forget his period in office was one of the most
prosperous in a lifetime for most. While allowing lots of investment in
public services, like the NHS.

So what? The Labour Party is usually allowed to take power in boom
times, so they can be blamed when the poorer part of the economic cycle
occurs, and the Conservatives duly elected as it looks better for the
latter to impoverish the poor. But Blair did not only presise over
expansion, he also consolidated de-professionalisation and privatisation
in the health and other sectors. Our rulers prefer to use Labour to do
this, as it is harder to whip up opposition.

There are no rulers that organise stuff like that.

What actually happened with Blair is that he managed
to **** over Labour enough so that enough of the voters
decided that Labour wasn't a bad alternative and the
economy was doing well enough so that enough were
prepared to give Blair a chance in govt.

Then 2008 happened and they gave Brown the bums
rush at the ballot box and enough of the voters had
decided that enough was enough to do that and to
see if the other crew could do any better, and they did
and got a decent parliamentary majority in the next
election when they did, after the downsides of a coalition
became obvious with what the LDs forced the coalition to do.

The same applies to anti-union laws which were
bitterly opposed when Thatcher proposed them,

Because she was clearly into ****ing over the coal miners etc.

but regarded as "statesmanlike" when Blair continued the process.

Don't buy that last. Enough the voters were ****ed off
enough at the more stupid union behaviour like with
the engine drivers etc.