Jump to content RIP Sheffield Admin Mort


Almost £4b more in cuts coming in the budget.

Recommended Posts

Those who do not have or who do have but also have a social conscience tend not to be Tory.
Ahem ...

I see the rich leftists who have money telling everyone that everything should be shared whilst living in castles and the poor leftists as those who never had the chance/ability/drive carrying a chip telling others who have worked to share what they've worked for.

 

The right wing might sell their grannies, but at least they'll admit to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The deficit went from 40bn to 160bn in under 2 years due to the crisis.

Osborne took over in 2010 pledging to eliminate the deficit by 2015. In 2014-15 he borrowed 88bn

 

Our current level of borrowing is higher than in 2008 at a point where we are supposed to be in surplus. In 2014-15 Osbone borrowed £1350 for every person in the country when he was supposed to be borrowing nothing.

 

Quite a mess.

 

Yes because of labours mismanagement of the economy and overspending in the public sector.

 

---------- Post added 18-03-2016 at 16:54 ----------

 

Both sides can use figures to show they are right. Labour can argue debt is higher, and the Tories can argue deficit is lower. Both are correct.

 

The deficit is the problem though because it is that that makes the debt grow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Guderian -Those who do not have or who do have but also have a social conscience tend not to be Tory.

 

Ahem ...

I see the rich leftists who have money telling everyone that everything should be shared whilst living in castles and the poor leftists as those who never had the chance/ability/drive carrying a chip telling others who have worked to share what they've worked for.

 

The right wing might sell their grannies, but at least they'll admit to it

 

You agree then.

......and you add some of your sweeping analysis of the leftists.

Add to that your opinion of the right wing.

I'm glad I don't live in your world.

 

That's a massive majority of the population you have just abused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did I now?

 

Then how come you immediately follow the above with:

Now isn't that exactly what I said in my first sentence? :rolleyes:

 

Now about:

and:

Personally, I'd have rather had Osbourne get the shock paddles out and run proper austerity, scorched earth and starving people in the street and all, to reset the economical and financial counters soonest on a clean base, rather than the soft landing and gradual take-off approach he's adopted, and the reason for which the UK has been dragging this deficit and interest on it like a ball and chain...but also the reason for which the UK is bouncing back better and faster than the rest. His policy has been, from day one and still, cashflow husbanding and management. Mine would have been bankruptcy and phoenixing in 2010.

 

But then, I was ready and prepared for it (full-on "I'm alright Jack" mode...or maybe schadenfreude, I'm not sure which - bite me either way, see if I care). And I'd have slept at night. Like a baby, because I'm way too cynical for my own good, and I certainly can be callous that way when the circumstances call for it.

 

Would you have slept at night? Honest answer, or don't bother.

 

Beyond that, I put above what I'd have done, were I in Osbourne's shoes. Now, what would you have done in Osbourne's shoes?

 

"la critique est aisée, mais l'art est difficile" Philippe Néricault, XVIIIth century. [ND: the criticism is easy, the art is difficult] :P;)

 

You went wrong because you are arguing that we are better placed now because the deficit has been reduced since 2010 wehereas if we were comparing the readiness of the economy to deal with another major shock the real comparison should be with 2008.

 

In 2008 we had a 40bn deficit. Right now it is double that. I would argue because of that and a host of other factors we are significantly less ready to cope.

 

---------- Post added 18-03-2016 at 17:50 ----------

 

Yes because of labours mismanagement of the economy and overspending in the public sector.

 

Actually it ballooned to 160bn because rapidly falling economic output led to less tax receipts, because welfare spending increased, because people lost their jobs, because of the costs of bailing out the banks and because of a fairly minor (given the scale of QE that followed) fiscal stimulus.

 

No matter how you try and pretend, the years 2009-10 and the second half of 2008 were not business as usual years for government spending and are characterised by a freak and infrequently seen 300% spike in deficit spending. None of it was planned.

 

I'm not defending Labour (far from it) but seriously if you are going to lie to yourself you'll never understand the problem.

Edited by I1L2T3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about taking the 4 bn needed in tax cuts from the foreign aid budget? We still give 12 bn a year in foreign aid even though the MP' s tell us we need austerity measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tories could be in serious trouble, especially given the calibre of the opposition. One poll today has them neck and neck with Labour. Another has Labour just ahead

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/jeremy-corbyn-handed-boost-labour-edges-conservatives-latest-poll-1550190

 

Of course we have to take polls with a pinch of salt given what happened in 2015 but Wednesday's budget looks to have been very damaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it ballooned to 160bn because rapidly falling economic output led to less tax receipts, because welfare spending increased, because people lost their jobs, because of the costs of bailing out the banks and because of a fairly minor (given the scale of QE that followed) fiscal stimulus.

 

No matter how you try and pretend, the years 2009-10 and the second half of 2008 were not business as usual years for government spending and are characterised by a freak and infrequently seen 300% spike in deficit spending. None of it was planned.

 

I'm not defending Labour (far from it) but seriously if you are going to lie to yourself you'll never understand the problem.

The banking bail out and QE money isn't included in the deficit figures and the mismanaged economy was an economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions that was always going to come crashing down.

 

---------- Post added 18-03-2016 at 19:50 ----------

 

Tories could be in serious trouble, especially given the calibre of the opposition. One poll today has them neck and neck with Labour. Another has Labour just ahead

 

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/jeremy-corbyn-handed-boost-labour-edges-conservatives-latest-poll-1550190

 

Of course we have to take polls with a pinch of salt given what happened in 2015 but Wednesday's budget looks to have been very damaging.

 

No the country is in serious trouble if a labour government is voted back into office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The banking bail out and QE money isn't included in the deficit figures and the mismanaged economy was an economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions that was always going to come crashing down.

 

---------- Post added 18-03-2016 at 19:50 ----------

 

 

No the country is in serious trouble if a labour government is voted back into office.

 

The housing bubble never popped. It kind of deflated a little and has been pumped back up by Osborne.

 

I never said QE was included in the deficit figures. Some banks were financially bailed out and that was included in the deficit figures.

 

The Tories are in trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The housing bubble never popped. It kind of deflated a little and has been pumped back up by Osborne.

 

I never said QE was included in the deficit figures. Some banks were financially bailed out and that was included in the deficit figures.

 

The Tories are in trouble.

 

I said an economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions was always going to come crashing down, and there is no doubt that the economy crashed.

The cash injection into the bank bail outs wasn't part of the deficit.

The deficit increased because labour committed its self to massive spending on the public sector, spending that it couldn't afford after the economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions come crashing down.

 

No the country is in trouble and voting Labour will make matters worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You went wrong because you are arguing that we are better placed now because the deficit has been reduced since 2010 wehereas if we were comparing the readiness of the economy to deal with another major shock the real comparison should be with 2008.
The datum for your Osbourne-criticizing logic is 2010 when Labour left office. Not 2008.

 

What was the deficit in 2010 and what spending commitments did Osbourne find on his desk when he took office?

Edited by L00b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said an economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions was always going to come crashing down, and there is no doubt that the economy crashed.

The cash injection into the bank bail outs wasn't part of the deficit.

The deficit increased because labour committed its self to massive spending on the public sector, spending that it couldn't afford after the economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions come crashing down.

 

No the country is in trouble and voting Labour will make matters worse.

what you should ask is would the people want a tory government hellbent on giving more money to the wealthy while imposing cuts on the poor and still not paying the national debt off

or do the people want a labour government hellbent on getting more out of the rich and giving the less well off a bit more cash and still not paying the national debt off :hihi: the debt will never be paid off in my lifetime but the rich still get richer and the less well off get shafted :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The datum for your Osbourne-criticizing logic is 2010 when Labour left office. Not 2008.

 

What was the deficit in 2010 and what spending commitments did Osbourne find on his desk when he took office?

 

No, the benchmark is the state of the economy when crisis strikes. The benchmark is 2008. You can't benchmark this against 2010 because that was the back end of the acute phase of the crisis.

 

You are telling me that the economy is stronger than it was in 2008 pre-crisis and able to withstand the same shock. You're wrong. We're hobbling on crutches and we've run out of ammo.

 

---------- Post added 18-03-2016 at 23:09 ----------

 

I said an economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions was always going to come crashing down, and there is no doubt that the economy crashed.

The cash injection into the bank bail outs wasn't part of the deficit.

The deficit increased because labour committed its self to massive spending on the public sector, spending that it couldn't afford after the economy built on an housing bubble of biblical proportions come crashing down.

 

 

Sorry, but this is complete rubbish. The housing bubble never popped. The housing market never truly crashed. The cash injected into banks was provided by the government. It wasn't off the balance sheet:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7666570.stm

 

There was never 160bn of public sector spending commitments.

 

Like I said. Lie to yourself (or believe the lies of your puppet masters) and you will never understand the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.