Protecting the rich
Published 31 Mar 2011 12:00
Share this
COUNCILLOR Martin Rooney of New Labour just cannot stop digging his own grave (Reporter, 15/3/11).
It is he who misjudges the intentions of New Labour voters in order to draw false conclusions about what they really think of the party.
Don't flatter yourself Martin - they're not voting for you.
That's the anti-Tory vote and you are the best of a bad lot.
It's a contaminated vote full of depair and hopelessness.
With regards to New Labour's budget, Councillor Jim Bollan was the only man to call a spade, a spade.
The rest pursued a 'who has the better cuts, who is the better liar and who is the better thief' agenda. Knighted by New Labour, the disgraced ex-chief of the Royal Bank of Scotland Sir Fred 'The Shred' Goodwin has taken out a super-injunction to stop people calling him a banker.
That is the mentality of the people behind these cuts and they will not hestitate to deprive your readers of their bread and butter.
In any event, the top priority budget response to everything has always been to keep the rich sweet.
That is why New Labour refuses to support the anti-cuts campaign.
As for the true cost of securitisation, which can't be published because it is commercially sensitive, how does that inform the majority of voters in this area who regularly take part in free and fair elections?
In the dark and none the wiser.
If debt is invested wisely, in productive assets, you can make money and pay off the debt.
That is sustainable or good debt, but it was bad debt and bad and an unwise decision to invest in unproductive assests such as property, that created this mess.
It will be forever associated with securitisation, something all of the mainstream parties backed to the hilt.
The costs have been astronomical and are still rising.
James Graham
Socialist News
This letter appeared in Dumbarton & Vale of Leven Reporter 29 Mar 11
Return to the main index, get more from this section or browse our Opinion archives.
