Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Severus

Coalition government not sure whether bears defecate in the woods

46 posts in this topic

I would laugh if the situation wasn't so tragic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21190108

Clegg has to be the most politically and economically illiterate leader of any of the main UK political parties in living memory. Fortunately, he and has party are heading for complete political obscurity in 2 years time. Sadly, despite his woeful incompetence he will end of with some well paid City, lobbying or diplomatic job post the next GE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would laugh if the situation wasn't so tragic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-21190108

It is worth pointing out again that if you voted for any mainstream party other than the Greens then you voted for massive cuts.

You can kid yourself you didn't, but you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth pointing out again that if you voted for any mainstream party other than the Greens then you voted for massive cuts.

You can kid yourself you didn't, but you did.

It is worth pointing out again that if you voted Lib Dem you voted Tory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth pointing out again that if you voted Lib Dem you voted Tory.

Bless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth pointing out again that if you voted for any mainstream party other than the Greens then you voted for massive cuts.

You can kid yourself you didn't, but you did.

Yep, I voted Lib Dem. I agree that cuts needed to be made, but not with the zeal that the coalition government did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I voted Lib Dem. I agree that cuts needed to be made, but not with the zeal that the coalition government did it.

It was nothing other than ideological zeal, without thought for consequences, it was a case of we have the opportunity and we have the excuse, so lets do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was nothing other than ideological zeal, without thought for consequences, it was a case of we have the opportunity and we have the excuse, so lets do it.

Absolutely, the problem is not so much that they are making cuts, but where those cuts are being made. The tories are just making the most of The opportunity they have been given to dismantle the welfare state. IMO they are doing this for ideological reasons and nothing else. That's the problem with ideology; it always trumps common sense in the end and therefore should never be trusted in politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was nothing other than ideological zeal, without thought for consequences, it was a case of we have the opportunity and we have the excuse, so lets do it.

Spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true Labour planned cuts. But only 50% of what Osborne dished out. It's also true that Labour planned cuts in captial spending, but then we did have 2% growth at the time. Osborne's first budget had killed that stone dead by Christmas 2010. TBF nothing had actually happened by then, but everyone knew (apart from Osborne presumably) what was about to happen and had had the living ###### scared out of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true Labour planned cuts. But only 50% of what Osborne dished out. It's also true that Labour planned cuts in captial spending, but then we did have 2% growth at the time. Osborne's first budget had killed that stone dead by Christmas 2010.

How do you know that Labour's version of cuts would have not had a similar effect? There was always going to be a point at which cuts - any cuts - would have started to have impact. Cutting budgets at a slower rate might actually have drawn out the flat economy for an even longer period or it might not. We won't ever know because that is not the road that was taken. However, the US, which I believe took a similar path to the one you say Labour proposed, is still on very shakey ground having only recently seen off (for now) falling off the 'fiscal cliff' and meanwhile their debt keeps on rising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, the US, which I believe took a similar path to the one you say Labour proposed, is still on very shakey ground having only recently seen off (for now) falling off the 'fiscal cliff' and meanwhile their debt keeps on rising.

The fiscal cliff was a very specific USA only issue. Nothing to do with spending way out or austerity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true Labour planned cuts. But only 50% of what Osborne dished out.

I think the figures put forward at the time of the election were within 10% of each other. The other difference was timescale. Labour said they would take an additional six months to reach that cutting amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was nothing other than ideological zeal, without thought for consequences, it was a case of we have the opportunity and we have the excuse, so lets do it.

Normally when people make definite statements you ask how they could know these things. Who is your source at Number 10?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fiscal cliff was a very specific USA only issue. Nothing to do with spending way out or austerity.

Not strictly true because the debt problem, and how to deal with the debt ceiling (above which, I believe, the US would be technically bankrupt) was one element to negotiations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you know that Labour's version of cuts would have not had a similar effect? There was always going to be a point at which cuts - any cuts - would have started to have impact. Cutting budgets at a slower rate might actually have drawn out the flat economy for an even longer period or it might not. We won't ever know because that is not the road that was taken. However, the US, which I believe took a similar path to the one you say Labour proposed, is still on very shakey ground having only recently seen off (for now) falling off the 'fiscal cliff' and meanwhile their debt keeps on rising.

the USA didn't take the exact same route that Gordon Brown set,

Would Britain have been better off in the eurozone?

Wow! I suppose there’s always some argument people could make, but, my God! Cameron and Osborne love to claim credit for Britain’s low borrowing costs, but in fact those seem to be overwhelmingly the result of the UK not being in the euro. Even now, with everything going on, Spain’s fiscal prospects look no worse and maybe better than Britain’s and yet interest rates there are 6.6 per cent and 1.6 per cent here. I actually think they ought to put up statue to Gordon Brown in Trafalgar Square to thank him for keeping Britain out of the euro. It would have been an utter disaster if Britain had joined.

Did Gordon Brown “save the world” in 2008?

I think it’s arguably right. We now look back in those six months after Lehman Brothers failed [in October 2008] and policymakers did the right things. They did what was necessary to stop a complete financial collapse. We now talk as if that was fated to happen, but maybe not. Clearly it was Gordon Brown who moved first in doing the bank recapitalisation. Without that maybe the people who thought it was great idea to let Lehman fail to eliminate moral hazard might have continued to carry the argument for another couple of months, by which time it might have been irreversible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maurauder, it isn't quite that simple, Germany is in the Euro but has even lower interest rates. It is not much to do with the Euro and everything to do with the perceived risk of default.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally when people make definite statements you ask how they could know these things. Who is your source at Number 10?

David Cameron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the USA didn't take the exact same route that Gordon Brown set,

Would Britain have been better off in the eurozone?

Wow! I suppose there’s always some argument people could make, but, my God! Cameron and Osborne love to claim credit for Britain’s low borrowing costs, but in fact those seem to be overwhelmingly the result of the UK not being in the euro. Even now, with everything going on, Spain’s fiscal prospects look no worse and maybe better than Britain’s and yet interest rates there are 6.6 per cent and 1.6 per cent here. I actually think they ought to put up statue to Gordon Brown in Trafalgar Square to thank him for keeping Britain out of the euro. It would have been an utter disaster if Britain had joined.

Did Gordon Brown “save the world” in 2008?

I think it’s arguably right. We now look back in those six months after Lehman Brothers failed [in October 2008] and policymakers did the right things. They did what was necessary to stop a complete financial collapse. We now talk as if that was fated to happen, but maybe not. Clearly it was Gordon Brown who moved first in doing the bank recapitalisation. Without that maybe the people who thought it was great idea to let Lehman fail to eliminate moral hazard might have continued to carry the argument for another couple of months, by which time it might have been irreversible.

Who said this? Paul Krugman?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/interview-with-economist-paul-krugman-greece-will-leave-eurozone-within-12-months-7804753.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what did he tell you?

its confidential, I couldn't possibly reveal what my sources tell me.

He has been in my living room most nights for years though with his wretched face sidekick Osborne though telling me what he wants to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not many folk know that I've got Mo Lindsay chained up in my attic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.