Ed Miliband is facing damaging new claims about his bitter feud with elder brother David over the Labour leadership.

However, they could fuel doubts about Mr Miliband's future at the helm of the party amid criticism of his performance against David Cameron.

news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Damag...other_David_Miliband

===

This is what happens when you haven't got a clue !

In The Know wrote:
Ed Miliband is facing damaging new claims about his bitter feud with elder brother David over the Labour leadership.

However, they could fuel doubts about Mr Miliband's future at the helm of the party amid criticism of his performance against David Cameron.

news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Damag...other_David_Miliband

===

This is what happens when you haven't got a clue !

no it's what happens when the media needs a story.

In The Know wrote:
Ed Miliband is facing damaging new claims about his bitter feud with elder brother David over the Labour leadership.

However, they could fuel doubts about Mr Miliband's future at the helm of the party amid criticism of his performance against David Cameron.

news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Damag...other_David_Miliband

===

This is what happens when you haven't got a clue !

If he's so crap then why is his party in the lead?
more balls from doris,aka Intheknow,hard 2 say if all the crap she sprouts is PMS,or lack of Se.....

If he's so crap then why is his party in the lead?

Wow. The Opposition doing okay(ish) in the polls a year into a new Government during a recession! What a turnup!!

Veritas,

It seems that your leader, the Millipede, is waking-up (even if you are not!).

Look what he had to say yesterday -

From BBC News - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13745118

He vowed to stop Labour being "the party of those ripping off our society" such as benefit cheats

"For too many people at the last election, we were seen as the party that represented these two types of people - those at the top and the bottom who were not showing responsibility and were shirking their duty to each other," he said.

"Labour - a party founded by hard-working people for hard-working people - was seen by some, however unfairly, as the party of those ripping off our society."

He suggested those who work or volunteer should get priority on council-house waiting lists - and backed coalition moves to test more people on incapacity benefit as fit for work.

===

Does he really believe this? (then why not call a scrounger, a scrouger?) - or is it just for the benefit of the voters who he knows will never re-elect (loony) Labour as it is ?

well he has to say that doesn't he because the meejah have convinced enough people (including you) that just about anyone receiving welfare is a 'scrounger' when it's simply not true because there is no proof !

I see nothing about the Millibrands that should frighten horses (except Ed may be an old style Labour person struggling to get out) and I'm sure Cameron etc are quite decent people at heart but they are in the grips of a media that tells them what to think.

###take all those [people off welfare..reduce rent payments and so ion and you will see a complete collapse in the market.

However it isn't going to happen...i promise you now..all the welfare 'reforms' touted will be quietly dropped.

And as I say thus it will be dome ! :silly:

veritas wrote:
However it isn't going to happen...i promise you now..all the welfare 'reforms' touted will be quietly dropped.

No they won'T - we simply do not have a choice - Labour left us with no money !

Unless we cut back now the truely deserving will find that the kitty is empty (I hear state pensions are often paid late already in Spain / Greece ... what about the day when they wont be paid at all?)

In The Know wrote:
[quote]veritas wrote:
. what about the day when they wont be paid at all?)

that's when the rich get eaten.

In The Know wrote:
we simply do not have a choice - Labour left us with no money !

Unless we cut back now the truely deserving will find that the kitty is empty (I hear state pensions are often paid late already in Spain / Greece ... what about the day when they wont be paid at all?)

Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."



Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."

veritas wrote:
that's when the rich get eaten.

... well, they've scrounged everything else !

DJones wrote:
In The Know wrote:
we simply do not have a choice - Labour left us with no money !

Unless we cut back now the truely deserving will find that the kitty is empty (I hear state pensions are often paid late already in Spain / Greece ... what about the day when they wont be paid at all?)

Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."



Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."

Should I take financial advice from someone who does not know how a message board works?

Nah !!!

In The Know wrote:
DJones wrote:
In The Know wrote:
we simply do not have a choice - Labour left us with no money !

Unless we cut back now the truely deserving will find that the kitty is empty (I hear state pensions are often paid late already in Spain / Greece ... what about the day when they wont be paid at all?)

Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."



Of course there is a choice! Take a look at this article:

Free money creation to bail out financial speculators, but not Social Security or Mediacare


"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as “the private sector” as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell. Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense. They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations - money - electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. The bailout of Wall Street showed how central banks can create money, as Modern Money Theory (MMT) explains. But rather than explaining how this phenomenon worked, the bailout was rammed through Congress under emergency conditions. Bankers threatened economic Armageddon if the government did not create the credit to save them from taking losses.

(...)

In the case of bailing out Wall Street - and thereby the wealthiest 1% of Americans - while saying there is no money for Social Security, Medicare or long-term public social spending and infrastructure investment, the beneficiaries are obvious. So are the losers. High finance means low wages, low employment, low industry and a shrinking economy under conditions where policy planning is centralized in hands of Wall Street and its political nominees rather than in more objective administrators."

Should I take financial advice from someone who does not know how a message board works?

Nah !!!

You've never taken advice from anyone in ur entire life Doris,be a shame to start now

the country may be broke but there is always enough to blow up another as in Lybia.

Doris is just a rude troll,get a life,even better get a job in this coalition paradise u think is so gr8,then you'd be around less to ruin this once gr8 board.

Innocent Accused wrote:
Doris is just a rude troll,get a life,even better get a job in this coalition paradise u think is so gr8,then you'd be around less to ruin this once gr8 board.

She's too busy drinking milk stout and telling anyone desperate enough to drink in her local how she'd put the world right...after reading the sun of course