indiepanda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I don't believe I claimed they did. I also don't > think that Labour having had money to put away was > anything much to do with what they did whilst in > power - there was a worldwide boom at the time, > and though Brown tried to take credit for a lot of > things, I think even he would have struggled to > take credit for all of that. > > Come to that Brown claimed he had put an end to > boom and bust and if making that sort of claim > isn't lacking in intelligence I don't know what > is. > > As for investing in schools, I'm not convinced > education standards rose under Labour so their > money spent on schools doesn't strike me as having > achieved much. Employers and university lecturers > have been telling everyone for years that the > quality of people coming out of secondary > education doesn't match up to their grades, the > crazy grade inflation isn't helping students. > > I'll grant you waiting lists in hospitals came > down and I would definitely support the increases > in pay given to nurses. > > However, my general view is all governments tend > to make political decisions with a large financial > impact that frequently ignore the economic reality > and I've seen no evidence that left wing > governments are any better than right wing ones on > that front. (Don't get me started on how > economically successful the communist states were) USA had a few recessions during Labour's term in power. So it is absurd to suggest that Gordon was lucky because of a world boom. As for grades inflation this phenomena is happening around the world and not confined to the UK.