Tory lies over borrowing

[FiF]

sunoco69 said:

FiF said:

In less liberal times such traitorous bds, and I make no apology for so referencing them, , those traitorous bds would have been dragged into the Tower through Traitor's Gate, hung drawn and quartered then beheaded and had their head displayed on a pike on London Bridge. Frankly that would have been too civilised for Blair and Brown.

And I, personally, would of severed their testicles, just prior to them being drawn and quartered. I would then of lightly fried them in a little oil and force fed them there own nads.

You are what you eat in reveres. They talk bks so they get to eat bks! I would of allowed them some HP sauce, I am not a cruel man.

I like your style. Personally would prefer to offer them Henderson' s relish just to reinforce the notion that the whole nation doesn't revolve around the farce that takes place in Westminster.

HP = Houses of Parliament iirc.

[AJS-]

Johnnytheboy said:

Rationing persisted that long because we pissed money away on the welfare state and the NHS, not despite it.

I would say rationing persisted that long for purely ideological reasons - Labour and indeed many Tories at the time thought that the government should set prices, and quite possibly sincerely believed they were helping people.

[sunoco69]

AJS- said:

Johnnytheboy said:

Rationing persisted that long because we pissed money away on the welfare state and the NHS, not despite it.

I would say rationing persisted that long for purely ideological reasons - Labour and indeed many Tories at the time thought that the government should set prices, and quite possibly sincerely believed they were helping people.

So the fact that we were trying to feed Europe, still had a massive amount of people under arms and that the work force at home kept striking, particularly the dockers, had nothing to do with it?

[oyster]

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

what has been cut to the bone?

There's over 5 MILLION people employed in public services?


If that is cut back to the bone, WTF are those 5m+ people doing?

[toppstuff]

If the OP wants to talk about borrowing , we really, really should not let people forget how Labour are absolute experts at it.

There is one thing we should talk about - PFI. Anyone here with the PFI numbers, showing the size of the PFI debt Labour created and then kept it OFF the UK balance sheet? I believe that if we include PFI then the Labour legacy is even more terrifying...

[Oakey]

Isn't it something like £30-£50billion?

ETA: Sorry, my mistake, £52billion is the value of the deals, what we owe is actually £121billion:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/87795...

"The price tag for repaying PFI firms will reach £8.6 billion next year alone, with the taxpayer owing a total of £121.4 billion on public projects which are worth only £52.9 billion. "

ETA (again): Nope, sorry, wait, my mistake...

"Many PFI deals tie local authorities into expensive catering, cleaning and maintenance contracts, meaning the total bill to the taxpayer is £229 billion"

Edited by Oakey on Monday 10th March 10:01

[Esseesse]

pcvdriver said:

simoid said:

The Tories aren't very good at making cuts?

Hindsight would tend to agree. Cuts were too deep and too severe and did more damage than help.

If these cuts were so deep and severe, how come they have not impacted my life in any noticeable way whatsoever? I don't think I know of anyone losing their job due to cuts.

The bins are emptied, roads swept, ambulances and fire engines doing their thing, police on the street, schools open, pot holes fixed (as much as ever), grassy areas maintained, traffic wardens swarming. And the council office was full of people apparently doing not a huge amount when I went in a few months ago. Pretty cushy austerity if you ask me.

[Johnnytheboy]

sunoco69 said:

AJS- said:

Johnnytheboy said:

Rationing persisted that long because we pissed money away on the welfare state and the NHS, not despite it.

I would say rationing persisted that long for purely ideological reasons - Labour and indeed many Tories at the time thought that the government should set prices, and quite possibly sincerely believed they were helping people.

So the fact that we were trying to feed Europe, still had a massive amount of people under arms and that the work force at home kept striking, particularly the dockers, had nothing to do with it?

This - we exported food that was rationed at home.

[toppstuff]

Esseesse said:

pcvdriver said:

simoid said:

The Tories aren't very good at making cuts?

Hindsight would tend to agree. Cuts were too deep and too severe and did more damage than help.

If these cuts were so deep and severe, how come they have not impacted my life in any noticeable way whatsoever? I don't think I know of anyone losing their job due to cuts.

The bins are emptied, roads swept, ambulances and fire engines doing their thing, police on the street, schools open, pot holes fixed (as much as ever), grassy areas maintained, traffic wardens swarming. And the council office was full of people apparently doing not a huge amount when I went in a few months ago. Pretty cushy austerity if you ask me.

I have to agree. I don't see any signs of austerity in terms of public services in my neck of the woods. Everything still works. Interaction with the NHS with my elderly relies is fine. Bins get emptied. Schools are functioning fine. I don't get it. If anything, it seems to me that we could cut more - our local council still seems to be infested with non-jobs.

[BlackLabel]

'Public service budgets being slashed to the bone'?

In what world is this actually happening? I am by no means your average PH (powerfully built, director, wouldn't get out of bed for less than 6 figures etc etc) therefore have relied a fair bit on these public services over the past couple of years and I'm stuggling to notice these 'savage cuts' as the Labour party and their supporters like to term them.

[Adrian W]

So this £billion we are about to give to Ukraine, we are promising money we don't have, are we borrowing it? if someone did that with their own personnel finances most people would think they were nuts.

[Art0ir]

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

Keynesian theory only ever has a hope of success when governments save during the boom part of the business cycle. When governments continue to squander cash during these times, the whole thing falls apart.

[turbobloke]

Art0ir said:

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

Keynesian theory only ever has a hope of success when governments save during the boom part of the business cycle. When governments continue to squander cash during these times, the whole thing falls apart.

That, while not forgetting that high taxes and high levels of public debt stifle growth. We were left with both in relative terms by incompetent Labour through to 2010. The Labour Party's whining that the Conservatives didn't catch the dead cat bounce is hilarious.

[simoid]

Andy Zarse said:

simoid said:

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

Could you please provide statistical evidence to support your claim that public spending is increasing under the Tories?

Is that in real terms, nominal, or a percentage of GDP?

Never mind that, I'd first like PVC to explain why he thinks govt spending is the main driver of the UK's economic output and why the "cuts to the bone" will curtail private growth.

I was giving an easy starter for 10 to see if he had any clue what he was on about

[Mosdef]

pcvdriver said:

The late 40's and 50's was when the country really did have austere condition to live with - there was still rationing in 1952, 7 years after the end of the war. Strangely enough when we were at our "skintest" this was created the welfare state and the NHS. So to claim that the levels of austerity today were necessary was simply a piss take.

I won't comment on any of your other points because they're absolutely farcical and I'm not sure you're bright enough to take them on board.

There has been speculation that the NHS and post WW2 welfare state were implemented to prevent a surge in communism in the UK i.e. the electorate wouldn't think the Soviet way of doing things was superior. The BBC cold war documentary series focused on it, so that's not to say it's true but it's not totally ridiculous given the fears at the time, the cold war etc.

The levels of austerity today are a piss take? Really? If you're spending more than you earn and have been for years, should you increase or decrease spending?

[sugerbear]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

What management is going to agree to cut the layers of management that shields them from the front line? Having a layer of managers on 100k that report to them justifies their 200k, those managers then have a further layer on 80k, then another layer on 40k. It is a giant ponzi scheme where the next level justifies the previous layer. You could quite easily go down to two layers of managers and not notice a difference.

If you want to point the finger at failing at any company/organisation it is because the top layer is so far away from the front line and their customers that they really have no clue what is going on and none of their direct reports are going to want to deliver bad news, so any bad news is hidden from the very people that ultimately have influence to change it.

[NicD]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

well said, so bloody obvious but some just don't see. Weird, some sort of political blindness.

[markcoznottz]

oyster said:

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

what has been cut to the bone?

There's over 5 MILLION people employed in public services?


If that is cut back to the bone, WTF are those 5m+ people doing?

Government scared stiff of civil service, it is very organised and riddled through with common purpose drones. Turkey's do not vote for Xmas.

[markcoznottz]

oyster said:

pcvdriver said:

No conflict in my views at all. The Tories cuts were infective DUE to them cutting budgets to the bone, further stifling growth, as people were panicked into spending less - meaning there was less cash floating around in the economy.
I'm not complaining that spending is at an all time high, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Tories blaming Labour's spending and then going out to spend even more themselves.

what has been cut to the bone?

There's over 5 MILLION people employed in public services?


If that is cut back to the bone, WTF are those 5m+ people doing?

[CubanPete]

You've picked one data representation from an article criticising labours monumental mismanagement of the economy and somehow it's the Tory's fault?