Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Giddy are you ok, are you ok Giddy; Fantastic work Mr Chance-a-lot.
Topic Started: Nov 7 2015, 01:33 AM (1,750 Views)
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
I'd just like to use this thread to thank the chancellor for his excellent work with regards to the following:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-george-osbornes-budget-2015-speech

Quote:
 

Our goal is for Britain to become the most prosperous major economy in the world, with that prosperity widely shared.



The man is a genius.
Edited by skwirked, Dec 1 2015, 07:26 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
"You actually want the Tories to win because Tony B Liar was Tory Lite, and you'd rather have Tory Lite than real Labour."

Sad but true.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
PV.
We know you have to keep telling the lie that there was no warning, because you need there to be no warning, because if there was a warning NuLab were irresponsible arseholes.
No you keep telling lies not me.

If you want to clear your name, give me a name a date and the comment in inverted comers, when someone warned that sub prime toxic debts were going to be, or were being, slipped into the international financial markets via Wall Street.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 9 2015, 07:11 PM
"You actually want the Tories to win because Tony B Liar was Tory Lite, and you'd rather have Tory Lite than real Labour."

Sad but true.
Second childhood revealed for all to see, why do you do it ? :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Nov 9 2015, 07:00 PM
gansao
Nov 9 2015, 04:52 PM
C-too
Nov 9 2015, 04:44 PM


He was always considered a maverick ..he was a disciple of Ayn Rand ,was a monetarist 'who thought outside the loop'
Jeez he extolled free market principles and self regulating markets.He was a neo liberalist from the start.
Ponzi schemes always work for a time.
There were warnings that were ignored. The reasons why they were ignored are debatable not the fact that they were there.
1. Not just nonsense but now your assessment of Greenspan is dishonest nonsense.
2. Yes exactly. So ?
3. Ponzi is not in dispute.
4. The warnings suggesting economic problems seemed to arrive in the 2005/06 period when NL were already beginning to cut back. i.e. Such warnings as those posted were TOO LATE to be of any use.


Nope, if you take your head out of your arse and read a bit about Greenspan you will realise not only that Greenspan was a committed objectivist but that he could not even disown his objectivist financial philosophy post meltdown. He was a chancer .
He extolled the self regulating financial free market. Great for financial institutions run by sociopaths but not for the rest of us .
Your political heroes were spivs riding on the back of a system that was bound to fail. Their problem was that it failed on their watch and all they have now is the occasional old delusional codger to make excuses for them.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

C-too
Nov 9 2015, 07:17 PM
skwirked
Nov 9 2015, 07:11 PM
"You actually want the Tories to win because Tony B Liar was Tory Lite, and you'd rather have Tory Lite than real Labour."

Sad but true.
Second childhood revealed for all to see, why do you do it ? :)


I guess you must be on your third or fourth one by now old chap ;-)
Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Because your '2nd childhood' needs exposing I guess? I dont know. Is that what C2 stands for?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Malum Unus
Member Avatar
Hater of Political Correctness and Legalese
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 9 2015, 06:28 PM
The All New UKDebate Spot the difference competition

C-too
Nov 8 2015, 06:05 PM
. .No one warned anyone that an international financial tsunami was just around the corner. . .
C-too
Nov 9 2015, 04:49 PM
There was no concrete warning of an international meltdown . .


What's that screeching noise?



It's the sound of the goalposts being shifted by C-too... AGAIN.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Nov 9 2015, 07:15 PM
slipped into the international financial markets via Wall Street.
AND IN THE CITY OF LONDON, WHICH WAS MORE THAN HAPPY TO TRADE TOXIC DEBT AND FACILITATE MADOFF AND ENRON TO NAME BUT TWO

Carry on! :)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I posted that it doesn't matter whether there were or not warnings of impending crisis in the PS sector, and yet this thread has continued to argue the point that warnings went unheeded - they always do. It's the short termism that rules, let others to come bear the the brunt of the problems.
There are warnings every week that go unheeded ....... all this talk of incompetence for ignoring them is just political posturing, and hypocritical in the extreme.

Edited by Affa, Nov 9 2015, 10:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 9 2015, 10:16 PM
I posted that it doesn't matter whether there were or not warnings of impending crisis in the PS sector, and yet this thread has continued to argue the point that warnings went unheeded - they always do. It's the short termism that rules, let others to come bear the the brunt of the problems.
There are warnings every week that go unheeded ....... all this talk of incompetence for ignoring them is just political posturing, and hypocritical in the extreme.

Yes but surely the point is that we know international leaders were warned, we know Brown was very directly and on the record warned but so many of them neither worked it out for themselves nor made sure they had research departments staffed with anything other than yes men and women

And for that they should be ashamed. Note though that several countries did not fall into the money bubble lunacy (iIRC Canada being one)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 9 2015, 10:45 PM


And for that they should be ashamed. Note though that several countries did not fall into the money bubble lunacy (iIRC Canada being one)
Canada currently has one of the worst potential housing bubbles of any nation, and this is probably the reason Carny got the BoE gig.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 9 2015, 10:45 PM
Affa
Nov 9 2015, 10:16 PM
I posted that it doesn't matter whether there were or not warnings of impending crisis in the PS sector, and yet this thread has continued to argue the point that warnings went unheeded - they always do. It's the short termism that rules, let others to come bear the the brunt of the problems.
There are warnings every week that go unheeded ....... all this talk of incompetence for ignoring them is just political posturing, and hypocritical in the extreme.

Yes but surely the point is that we know international leaders were warned, we know Brown was very directly and on the record warned but so many of them neither worked it out for themselves nor made sure they had research departments staffed with anything other than yes men and women

And for that they should be ashamed. Note though that several countries did not fall into the money bubble lunacy (iIRC Canada being one)
I cannot believe that Gordy could not read the signs, after all, he was hailed as the most prudent and iron chancellor that this country had ever known, he was to be our saviour..... (Alistair Darling and other grandees will tell you differently now).true to character, Labour defaulted to their usual position of borrow and spend and created a bloated public sector and bought off a client based voting sector with welfare largesse and now that reality has set in and those sectors need to be cut back the usuals are screaming blue murder....this is what happens when you set precedents built on sand with money borrowed from the next generation of taxpayers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Short term aims Rich!
Anyhow, what Brown should have done and could have done are very different ........ the Establishment rule not Westminster.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa: "There are warnings every week that go unheeded"

I am totally confident that you're right. I think all of the last 4-5 govts have been unmitigated disasters staffed by incompetent Yes Minister yesmen.

IMO, Brown is only very marginally better than the current lot.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Nov 7 2015, 08:01 AM
skwirked
Nov 7 2015, 01:33 AM
I'd just like to use this thread to thank the chancellor for his excellent work with regards to the following:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-george-osbornes-budget-2015-speech

Quote:
 

Our goal is for Britain to become the most prosperous major economy in the world, with that prosperity widely shared.



The man is a genius.
That sentence in itself is a complete fabrication. Bloody incompetent lying git - what bullshite!
He also said "that a surplus will make our country more resilient and secure It means that the next time we have the money to help us through the tough times when the storm comes.
If our country does not bring our deficit down, the deficit can bring our country down. That is why fir the economic security of every family in Britain, the worst thing we could do now as a country is to lose our nerve."

It is unfortunate that so many have already lost it, or do not have the courage to face it, or had no nerve to lose in the first place.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Nov 9 2015, 11:11 PM
Lewis
Nov 7 2015, 08:01 AM
skwirked
Nov 7 2015, 01:33 AM
I'd just like to use this thread to thank the chancellor for his excellent work with regards to the following:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-george-osbornes-budget-2015-speech


Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
That sentence in itself is a complete fabrication. Bloody incompetent lying git - what bullshite!
He also said "that a surplus will make our country more resilient and secure It means that the next time we have the money to help us through the tough times when the storm comes.
If our country does not bring our deficit down, the deficit can bring our country down. That is why fir the economic security of every family in Britain, the worst thing we could do now as a country is to lose our nerve."

It is unfortunate that so many have already lost it, or do not have the courage to face it, or had no nerve to lose in the first place.
Probably because they do not really know what it is like to be desperately without, as all if not most now have somewhere to turn to, ie, the state and you do not even have to be a UK citizen to obtain that help, there were no benefits when I was a kid and yet my childhood was happy, carefree and easygoing because my parents looked after us kids before themselves, and boy, have we left it too late to appreciate those sacrifices, nonetheless, I cannot do enough for my 89 year old dad now, he is my hero, sadly it is 25 years too late to help my best friend in life....apologies for being maudlin.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Nov 9 2015, 11:11 PM
Lewis
Nov 7 2015, 08:01 AM
skwirked
Nov 7 2015, 01:33 AM
I'd just like to use this thread to thank the chancellor for his excellent work with regards to the following:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-george-osbornes-budget-2015-speech


Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
That sentence in itself is a complete fabrication. Bloody incompetent lying git - what bullshite!
He also said "that a surplus will make our country more resilient and secure It means that the next time we have the money to help us through the tough times when the storm comes.
If our country does not bring our deficit down, the deficit can bring our country down. That is why fir the economic security of every family in Britain, the worst thing we could do now as a country is to lose our nerve."

It is unfortunate that so many have already lost it, or do not have the courage to face it, or had no nerve to lose in the first place.
:thumbsup: You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 9 2015, 06:28 PM
The All New UKDebate Spot the difference competition

C-too
Nov 8 2015, 06:05 PM
. .No one warned anyone that an international financial tsunami was just around the corner. . .
C-too
Nov 9 2015, 04:49 PM
There was no concrete warning of an international meltdown . .


What's that screeching noise?

It really does not matter if there was a tsunami or not, it is the responsibility of a Gov. to protect the economy not place it in a position of greater risk. Brown failed in his duty to protect the UK economy and he did place the UK in one of the most exposed positions in the G20. It is a simple fact, however, those that wish to white-wash over the truth attempt to hide behind the main event, the economic tsunami not of Brown's making. He did not cause such although his monetary policies exacerbated the situation, what he did was leave us near naked to face the chill winds. The other weird thing is that the left signs up for JMK when it comes to spending, but totally ignore the other side of his recommendations. Yes JMK does say spend in times of recession, but save during the boom years. Funny that!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
. . . You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Well looking back the line you are referring to is

"Our goal is for Britain to become the most prosperous major economy in the world, with that prosperity widely shared."

Why do you say that's a lie?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Nationalise banking!
It prevents this ever happening again, removes the problem of who best to lend to (SMEs), and keeps reserves to tide over the downturns.

But would you trust a Tory not to try to privatise it again?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 10:38 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
. . . You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Well looking back the line you are referring to is

"Our goal is for Britain to become the most prosperous major economy in the world, with that prosperity widely shared."

Why do you say that's a lie?
Because they know they cant deliver.

Why do you think J Twunt talked about uk workers becoming like the Chinese?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 10 2015, 10:38 AM
Nationalise banking!
It prevents this ever happening again, removes the problem of who best to lend to (SMEs), and keeps reserves to tide over the downturns.

But would you trust a Tory not to try to privatise it again?

Why would nationalising Banking be beneficial? Do you believe that Bank Managers on the Public Payroll will make better investment decisions? Do you believe there is evidence that Politicians are better at picking winners?
Sounds a bonkers idea too me. Private Banks provide excellent services in the open market, internationally, and as a consequence drive costs down and revenues to the Exchequer up. Surely it is the risks associated with Casino Banking we wish to stop? If this is true then why believe State control the only viable option? Unless of course one is fully signed up to Marxism where on the State, State controls and dictatorship of the Prols counts.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 9 2015, 11:11 PM
Lewis
Nov 7 2015, 08:01 AM
He also said "that a surplus will make our country more resilient and secure It means that the next time we have the money to help us through the tough times when the storm comes.
If our country does not bring our deficit down, the deficit can bring our country down. That is why fir the economic security of every family in Britain, the worst thing we could do now as a country is to lose our nerve."

It is unfortunate that so many have already lost it, or do not have the courage to face it, or had no nerve to lose in the first place.
:thumbsup: You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Its nothing to do with what the Tories say ,it is to do with the reality ,history, and facts as reported in Parliament, and the media. I cannot be in denial for party political gain.

From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. This national debt matters. It must be serviced with regular interest payments, diverting money from front-line public services. Even at rock-bottom interest rates, the Government spends as much on debt interest annually as on defence. As the national debt escalates, courtesy of £100bn-plus annual deficits, and as interest rates inevitably rise, we’ll soon be spending more on government debt service than on state education.

Why should we borrow so much, foisting our profligacy on our children and grandchildren – who will, even without the burden of our debts, face life in a much more competitive world. A spiralling national debt isn’t only bad economics, but is also morally repugnant.

http://www.debtbombshell.com
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:00 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 9 2015, 11:11 PM
:thumbsup: You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Its nothing to do with what the Tories say ,it is to do with the reality ,history, and facts as reported in Parliament, and the media. I cannot be in denial for party political gain.

From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. This national debt matters. It must be serviced with regular interest payments, diverting money from front-line public services. Even at rock-bottom interest rates, the Government spends as much on debt interest annually as on defence. As the national debt escalates, courtesy of £100bn-plus annual deficits, and as interest rates inevitably rise, we’ll soon be spending more on government debt service than on state education.

Why should we borrow so much, foisting our profligacy on our children and grandchildren – who will, even without the burden of our debts, face life in a much more competitive world. A spiralling national debt isn’t only bad economics, but is also morally repugnant.

http://www.debtbombshell.com
:rubchin:

If anything you've just enhanced the point I made. So why do you persist in supporting the Tories?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 10 2015, 10:38 AM
Nationalise banking!


:facepalm: Would Gordon in 2002 have told a nationalised bank to be sensible and heed what Cable had just told him in the House? :nono:

Quote:
 
It prevents this ever happening again, removes the problem of who best to lend to (SMEs),
:facepalm: :facepalm: You have looked at the bankruptcy rate for SMEs haven't you, you have looked at the massive subsidies SMEs get haven't you. They have their place, a vital place but it will always be a minor part of the economy.

Quote:
 
and keeps reserves to tide over the downturns.
:nono: See above and you miss the problem. The issue wasn't the government deficit but the unsustainable levels of welfare and boom fuelled wages.

Quote:
 
But would you trust a Tory not to try to privatise it again?
More the opposite. I'd trust them to privatise same thereby re-exposing private investors to the risks banks take.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
" See above and you miss the problem. The issue wasn't the government deficit but the unsustainable levels of welfare and boom fuelled wages. "

Really. Here I was thinking it was the greed of the banks and Brown's love for them and their casino operations, his love for cheap money and his overwhelming ignorance. And the Tories are much, much worse.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:03 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:00 AM
. .From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. . .
:rubchin:

If anything you've just enhanced the point I made. So why do you persist in supporting the Tories?
So you seem to be saying Osborne should in 2010 have made a vicious cut in welfare spending back to 2001 levels in real terms to rapidly cut the deficit so the debt did not increase. True?

A yes or no will do.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Nov 10 2015, 10:47 AM
Affa
Nov 10 2015, 10:38 AM
Nationalise banking!
It prevents this ever happening again, removes the problem of who best to lend to (SMEs), and keeps reserves to tide over the downturns.

But would you trust a Tory not to try to privatise it again?

Why would nationalising Banking be beneficial? Do you believe that Bank Managers on the Public Payroll will make better investment decisions? Do you believe there is evidence that Politicians are better at picking winners?
Sounds a bonkers idea too me.

That sounds bonkers because it is! What you see is how Nationalisation UK style has been managed. Are Eon, EDF managed by politicians or by successful professionals operating as Capitalists in a competitive market?
I wouldn't trust a Tory to manage a corner shop ......... they'd ruin it Osborne & Little style - Pocket the proceeds and declare a loss.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 9 2015, 11:11 PM
Lewis
Nov 7 2015, 08:01 AM
He also said "that a surplus will make our country more resilient and secure It means that the next time we have the money to help us through the tough times when the storm comes.
If our country does not bring our deficit down, the deficit can bring our country down. That is why fir the economic security of every family in Britain, the worst thing we could do now as a country is to lose our nerve."

It is unfortunate that so many have already lost it, or do not have the courage to face it, or had no nerve to lose in the first place.
:thumbsup: You were lied to; short answer.

Do you not feel silly having taken everything the Tories have said as gospel?
Do you not feel sillier in not believing anything they say?
There are political parties in the HOS whose duty is to oppose the government, to keep it on its toes, so why do we not hear the denials from them?
Could it be that the facts are true, and that they cannot deny it, and if they do not seek to deny it or contradict what is said, why do you? Find out for yourself how much the National debt costs a day to service. I understand it costs a billion pounds A DAY in interest alone. If I am wrong please put in the correct figure, for the only thing that matters is fact, not the reputation or integrity of the poster.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 11:11 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:03 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:00 AM
. .From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. . .
:rubchin:

If anything you've just enhanced the point I made. So why do you persist in supporting the Tories?
So you seem to be saying Osborne should in 2010 have made a vicious cut in welfare spending back to 2001 levels in real terms to rapidly cut the deficit so the debt did not increase. True?

A yes or no will do.
Nope, he should have cut the defence budget to about 10bn and withdrawn all troops, cut top civil servants in all areas pay, cut MPs pay, cut BS welfare provisions like private sector W2W schemes and introduced a neg inc tax/min income instead, which would have saved £bns in admin costs. The welfare employees could have been retrained and redeployed in other areas.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:03 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:00 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
Its nothing to do with what the Tories say ,it is to do with the reality ,history, and facts as reported in Parliament, and the media. I cannot be in denial for party political gain.

From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. This national debt matters. It must be serviced with regular interest payments, diverting money from front-line public services. Even at rock-bottom interest rates, the Government spends as much on debt interest annually as on defence. As the national debt escalates, courtesy of £100bn-plus annual deficits, and as interest rates inevitably rise, we’ll soon be spending more on government debt service than on state education.

Why should we borrow so much, foisting our profligacy on our children and grandchildren – who will, even without the burden of our debts, face life in a much more competitive world. A spiralling national debt isn’t only bad economics, but is also morally repugnant.

http://www.debtbombshell.com
:rubchin:

If anything you've just enhanced the point I made. So why do you persist in supporting the Tories?
Because AFFA it does not seem that Labour or any other opposition party will bite the bullet, grasp the nettle, or even admit that there is a problem . As on this board with their supporters they are all in denial. A simple fact of life, without moralising the facts is that the recipients of benefit are the less well off .It is they that are costing the country, the taxpayers money, and are pushing up the national debt. Is anyone suggesting that in some cases their benefits should not be cut to reduce the demands and help pay off the debt.?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 11:06 AM
Affa
Nov 10 2015, 10:38 AM
Nationalise banking!


:facepalm: Would Gordon in 2002 have told a nationalised bank to be sensible and heed what Cable had just told him in the House? :nono:

Quote:
 
It prevents this ever happening again, removes the problem of who best to lend to (SMEs),
:facepalm: :facepalm: You have looked at the bankruptcy rate for SMEs haven't you, you have looked at the massive subsidies SMEs get haven't you. They have their place, a vital place but it will always be a minor part of the economy.

Quote:
 
and keeps reserves to tide over the downturns.
:nono: See above and you miss the problem. The issue wasn't the government deficit but the unsustainable levels of welfare and boom fuelled wages.

Quote:
 
But would you trust a Tory not to try to privatise it again?
More the opposite. I'd trust them to privatise same thereby re-exposing private investors to the risks banks take.
An obsession with Gordon Brown is unhealthy!

Small and medium enterprises employed 14,424,000 people in the UK in 2013. ... Review estimates the Gross Value Added of SMEs as €473 billion or 49.8% of the UK economy

You whined when I described your take on what Welfare reforms should be taken - said I was wrong. Now you prove me correct.

You place trust in Tories after everything you have learnt ...... what's the term again - cognitive dissonance. or should that just read 'dense'?

I'll leave the last bit here, having considered removing it. My reason is that the term 'dense' more adequately describes what 'cognitive dissonance' actually means!



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:18 AM
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 11:11 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:03 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So you seem to be saying Osborne should in 2010 have made a vicious cut in welfare spending back to 2001 levels in real terms to rapidly cut the deficit so the debt did not increase. True?

A yes or no will do.
Nope, he should have cut the defence budget to about 10bn and withdrawn all troops, cut top civil servants in all areas pay, cut MPs pay, cut BS welfare provisions like private sector W2W schemes and introduced a neg inc tax/min income instead, which would have saved £bns in admin costs. The welfare employees could have been retrained and redeployed in other areas.
In the 1920s the defence budget was reduced to a point of leaving us defenceless, whilst Hitler was increasing his and growing his armed forces. It was a Labour Government that increased spending and built up the RAF just in time to give Britain a fighting chance in the Battle of Britain.
Modern technology cannot be built in a day , and we need to be prepared and protected not only from potential enemies, but from pacifists like Corbyn, and it seems from yourself and those like you. Our potential enemies are NOT pacifists.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
skwirked
On Enforced Vacation
[ *  *  *  * ]
So much opinion and such little substance.

The rich are given plenty of welfare.

"As well as individual private landlords, companies providing private housing were being subsidised by housing benefit, in some cases receiving more than a million pounds of taxpayers' money each year, such as Grainger Residential Management and Caridon Property.

One such private landlord is Conservative MP Richard Benyon, one of Britain's wealthiest parliamentarians whose family is worth around £110m. Despite having condemned spending on social security for "rising inexorably and unaffordably", and having applauded the government for "reforming Labour's 'something for nothing' welfare culture", Benyon benefits from £120,000 a year through housing benefit collected from his tenants. Another vigorous supporter of cuts to the welfare state was Tory MP Richard Drax, whose estate received a substantial £13,830 housing benefit in 2013. They are both wealthy benefit claimants who advocate slashing state support for the poor.

Much of Britain's public sector has now become a funding stream for profiteering companies. According to the National Audit Office (NAO), around half of the £187bn spent by the public sector on goods and services now goes on private contractors. One such company was Atos, first hired in 2005 by the then Labour government to carry out work-capability assessments. Its contract was renewed by the coalition in November 2010, now with far greater responsibilities as the government launched a sweeping programme of so-called "welfare reform". This five-year contract was worth £500m, or £100m of public money every year. In 2012 the NAO condemned the government contract with Atos for failing to offer value for money. Atos had not "routinely met all the service standards specified in the contract", the report declared; its record on meeting targets was "poor"; the government had failed to seek "adequate financial redress for underperformance"; and the "management of the contract lacked sufficient rigour".

..

In 2012, £4bn of taxpayers' money was shovelled into the accounts of the biggest private contractors: Serco, G4S, Atos and Capita. It led to a damning assessment from the NAO, which Margaret Hodge, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, summed up: this outsourcing, she concluded, had created "quasi-monopolies", the "inhibiting of whistleblowers", the trapping of taxpayers into lengthy contracts, and a "number of contracts that are not subject to proper competition". G4S had been contracted to provide security personnel for the 2012 Olympics; when it failed to provide them, the state – predictably – had to step in, mobilising 3,500 soldiers and leading even the then minister of defence, Philip Hammond, publicly to question his previously unwavering commitment to private sector provision of state functions. At the end of 2013, the Serious Fraud Office launched an investigation into Serco and G4S, after they allegedly overcharged the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds for the electronic tagging of clients, charging for clients who had left the country or were even dead. Many of these private contractors, such as Atos and G4S, pay little or no corporation tax, even as they benefit from state munificence.


'Privatisation of rail was a form of socialism for the rich.' Photograph: Velar Grant/Demotix/Corbis Velar Grant/ Velar Grant/Demotix/Corbis
Privatisation of rail was a form of socialism for the rich that became particularly notorious. According to a report by the Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change, state spending on the privatised railways was six times higher than it was in the dying days of British Rail. And yet under the privatised system, rolling stock was replaced less frequently, there was not enough carriage space to accommodate rising numbers of rail passengers, and ticket prices were the highest in Europe. As the report put it, technological innovation and improvement were powered or underwritten by the state. The taxpayer shouldered the risk, while profit was privatised: or "heads they win and tails we lose".

Big business is dependent on the state in a multitude of other ways. An expensive law-and-order system defends its property. The privatisation of Royal Mail ensured that the state kept the pension liabilities – nationalising the debt, privatising the profit. The business elite benefits from around £10bn spent on research and development by the British state each year: and innovations from the internet to the technology behind the iPhone originate from public sector research, as Mariana Mazzucato uncovered in The Entrepreneurial State. Big business relies on extensive spending on infrastructure: in 2012, the Confederation of British Industry suggested savings from cuts to benefits – raids on the pockets of the working and non-working poor – could be used to invest in the road network. And the state educates the workforce of big business at vast expense.
"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Some will not absorb any of this ...... it wil not cause a change of perspective or belief ...... they may react through stress, exhibit cognitive dissonance, and could be autistic - unable to see the world as it is and only as they are told to imagine it is.
The poorest in society are told that the country is in debt, cannot pay the bills, isn't earning enough. The ones telling them that are not in debt, can pay their bills, and are certainly earning enough not to sense austerity.

Alas we have nobody holding these to account!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 11:06 AM

The issue wasn't the government deficit but the unsustainable levels of welfare and boom fuelled wages.
Posted Image

Now tell us why Welfare became unsustainable?
It wasn't Gordon Brown increasing the burden through welfare, was it?
It was of course the bankers screwing up ........ so my suggestion to prevent it happening again remains valid ....... even more so now you realise that blaming others just doesn't address the problem.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 10 2015, 11:28 AM
An obsession with Gordon Brown is unhealthy!



Well so many here prefer his approach to the economy over Osborne's the truth has to be told every now and then

Affa
 
Small and medium enterprises employed 14,424,000 people in the UK in 2013. ... Review estimates the Gross Value Added of SMEs as €473 billion or 49.8% of the UK economy
So you don't deny their bankruptcy rate or their subsidies. Have you looked at their record on treating employees fairly?

Affa
 
You whined when I described your take on what Welfare reforms should be taken - said I was wrong. Now you prove me correct.
We have a winner of today's 'Didn't read the post so just made up a false story award'. Do you need this explained to you in simpler terms?

Affa
 
You place trust in Tories after everything you have learnt...
On that particular point yes I could.

Quote:
 
... what's the term again - cognitive dissonance. or should that just read 'dense'?

I'll leave the last bit here, having considered removing it. My reason is that the term 'dense' more adequately describes what 'cognitive dissonance' actually means!
Pot calling kettle black.You try so hard Affa to land a punch on me, I know not why but here's a tip: if you don't want to be shown up as an air puncher first check your allegation is based on fact not anger fuelled imaginings

Edited by Steve K, Nov 10 2015, 12:13 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:32 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:18 AM
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 11:11 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Nope, he should have cut the defence budget to about 10bn and withdrawn all troops, cut top civil servants in all areas pay, cut MPs pay, cut BS welfare provisions like private sector W2W schemes and introduced a neg inc tax/min income instead, which would have saved £bns in admin costs. The welfare employees could have been retrained and redeployed in other areas.
In the 1920s the defence budget was reduced to a point of leaving us defenceless, whilst Hitler was increasing his and growing his armed forces. It was a Labour Government that increased spending and built up the RAF just in time to give Britain a fighting chance in the Battle of Britain.
Modern technology cannot be built in a day , and we need to be prepared and protected not only from potential enemies, but from pacifists like Corbyn, and it seems from yourself and those like you. Our potential enemies are NOT pacifists.
yes it seems skwirked would renege on agreements, leave us defenceless, throw many into unemployment and cut welfare.

Nice?

I'd go with Osborne's ideas instead but I'm sure there is a third way
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:03 AM
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:00 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 07:45 AM
Its nothing to do with what the Tories say ,it is to do with the reality ,history, and facts as reported in Parliament, and the media. I cannot be in denial for party political gain.

From the Telegraph.

When the Tories took office, total government debt was £811bn. On last week’s figures, it’s now £1,451bn – an 80pc rise in just five years, with a lot more to come. This national debt matters. It must be serviced with regular interest payments, diverting money from front-line public services. Even at rock-bottom interest rates, the Government spends as much on debt interest annually as on defence. As the national debt escalates, courtesy of £100bn-plus annual deficits, and as interest rates inevitably rise, we’ll soon be spending more on government debt service than on state education.

Why should we borrow so much, foisting our profligacy on our children and grandchildren – who will, even without the burden of our debts, face life in a much more competitive world. A spiralling national debt isn’t only bad economics, but is also morally repugnant.

http://www.debtbombshell.com
:rubchin:

If anything you've just enhanced the point I made. So why do you persist in supporting the Tories?
Because the alternative would make the bad situation even worse. If one's objective is to repair the economy then there is only one politically viable choice currently on offer. When Labour comes out and says it takes the deficit and the debt as serious matters, they they might develop alternative and even more acceptable strategies. But until they do I will not hold my breath. At the moment I see that any vote for Labour as anti future.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 10 2015, 12:04 PM
Tytoalba
Nov 10 2015, 11:32 AM
skwirked
Nov 10 2015, 11:18 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
In the 1920s the defence budget was reduced to a point of leaving us defenceless, whilst Hitler was increasing his and growing his armed forces. It was a Labour Government that increased spending and built up the RAF just in time to give Britain a fighting chance in the Battle of Britain.
Modern technology cannot be built in a day , and we need to be prepared and protected not only from potential enemies, but from pacifists like Corbyn, and it seems from yourself and those like you. Our potential enemies are NOT pacifists.
yes it seems skwirked would renege on agreements, leave us defenceless, throw many into unemployment and cut welfare.

Nice?

I'd go with Osborne's ideas instead but I'm sure there is a third way
If you are sure of a third way then I would suspect you have already evaluated such, therefore, why not share?

I could agree that there are differing targets for cuts in public spending. I could agree that phasing could be changed, with myself in the sooner deeper group, but I see no alternative other than cutting the deficit to zero, generating a surplus and seeking to get the mountain of debt to a more acceptable level. Brown said ~40% of GDP was OK, I would like less, but would be happy to achieve Gordon's target for a safe-zone.

The problem we have is that many appear to allow themselves, willingly, to be bamboozled into the concept that it is OK to live on borrowed money and expect future generations to pay. They do not see or care that such a strategy cannot be continued forever, so if not when is the best time to stop it? With a growing economy the answer is yesterday.





Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
3 users reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply