Tory lies over borrowing
Discussion
We really do need a better way of teaching our kids life skills.
"Life was better under Labour..."
Answer: Of course it was. Any half drunk imbecile with access to max out all the credit cards and bank accounts can have a hell of a party.
Problem is: It has to be paid for at some time.
Labour's trick is not to be around when it comes time to pick up the tab.
For 10 years, for every £3 Labour took in tax, they spend £4.
If you can't grasp that this is a bad idea - tell your partner to take away your credit cards.
"Life was better under Labour..."
Answer: Of course it was. Any half drunk imbecile with access to max out all the credit cards and bank accounts can have a hell of a party.
Problem is: It has to be paid for at some time.
Labour's trick is not to be around when it comes time to pick up the tab.
For 10 years, for every £3 Labour took in tax, they spend £4.
If you can't grasp that this is a bad idea - tell your partner to take away your credit cards.
Oakey said:
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"
PFI liability is now firmly in the public sector's accounts. It was originally a wheeze to get infrastructure delivered, whilst keeping debt out of the PSBR (and keeping to golden rule), but new accountancy rules mean it has to be on "someone's" balance sheet.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
Worth noting the first PFIs came about under Major's Conservative government, but Labour went to town with the idea.
Also worth noting that these "huge" payments are basically buying services that the public want / need...eg new schools, new hospitals, new street lights etc. Very much like a mortgage - you choose what you want, you get possession of it, and then you pay for it over years and years. Fees are added at the start to make it seem free, but they are compound over the life of the scheme.
Assuming we (the public) do want these things built, the old way would be to borrow the debt, and employ public servants to design, build and run them. The traditional methods would probably be cheaper if the government didn't chuck sweeteners (PFI credits) to bodies entering into PFIs. But there'd be no fees for the lawyers, bankers and asset companies, who all take a nice big slice of the action.
Which is better?
Hard to say - as with most things, it depends entirely on your political point of view (much like this thread).
The Audit Commission (or was it NAO) found they were pretty good at delivering what they set out to do, but were probably a bit more expensive than the public body doing the paying first expected.
Ian
And also, does anyone else feel the OP might be related to the gentlemen in the red jumper in this sketch(0:09)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3tUqRBiMVo
Ian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3tUqRBiMVo
Ian
Ian Geary said:
Worth noting the first PFIs came about under Major's Conservative government, but Labour went to town with the idea.
IIRC (please correct me if wrong) the point of PFI was for things that would pay for themselves, hence the arguably reasonable practice of the cost not showing in govt debt. Then Labour decided it would be a good idea to use it for school and hospitals and things that would not cover the cost... So they had their own ideas, rather then going to town with sensible ones.The latest figures show that borrowing is increasing again.
George Osborne set to miss deficit targets as Government borrowing jumps
Real public spending increases rapidly, especially on capital investment
Osborne on Course to Miss Borrowing Target as U.K. Deficit Climbs
George Osborne set to miss deficit targets as Government borrowing jumps
Real public spending increases rapidly, especially on capital investment
Osborne on Course to Miss Borrowing Target as U.K. Deficit Climbs
oyster said:
TheEnd said:
Lies, damn lies, and statistics was the phrase.
I'd always tend to measure borrowing in terms of £'s, not % of earnings.
Why?I'd always tend to measure borrowing in terms of £'s, not % of earnings.
Is a £100k mortgage now, worse than a £90k mortgage 20 years ago? That's what you're suggesting.
You don't get a mortgage of 5x your salary, swap to a lower paid job and then have less to pay back, or get a pay rise and have to pay more back.
crankedup said:
Are we, as a Nation, still printing money (billions upon billions) or has the press now stopped? Quite likely it is only this that saved us from complete bankruptcy. And yet it is rarely mentioned.
There is nothing in itself new in this - it is called fractional reserve banking. It is how capitalism works. The big question is if it is done to excess. Given that inflation is not rising in spite of the extra cash being pumped into the system, this suggests that we don't need to worry too much yet.When QE started, people were talking about Zimbabwe and having currency devalued to such an extent that a loaf of bread cost a million pounds because of rampant inflation. This never happened. Its not likely too anytime soon, either.
wc98 said:
markcoznottz said:
Government scared stiff of civil service, it is very organised and riddled through with common purpose drones. Turkey's do not vote for Xmas.
this, how the hell it is addressed is another issue all on it,s own though.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232804/Go...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/exclusive-mic...
Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 25th October 08:17
turbobloke said:
Michael Gove showed the way, his approach needs repeating and pushing down the ranks.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232804/Go...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/exclusive-mic...
And then Gove was sacked himself, a lesson for other ministers who rock the boat? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232804/Go...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/exclusive-mic...
Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 25th October 08:17
greygoose said:
turbobloke said:
Michael Gove showed the way, his approach needs repeating and pushing down the ranks.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232804/Go...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/exclusive-mic...
And then Gove was sacked himself, a lesson for other ministers who rock the boat? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2232804/Go...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/exclusive-mic...
Edited by turbobloke on Saturday 25th October 08:17
Unfortunately, Labour's overspending legacy was so utterly appalling that much of the current borrowing is to service the debt left behind by Labour. The true lie is the Labour lie that the Tories are making cuts in places which hurt; what the Tories are trying to do is what any sensible person running their own household would do - i.e. cutting unnecessary expenditure while servicing a debt - not easy when you have entrenched vested interests, particularly is some areas of the public sector where Labour have installed their influential overpaid, underworked sympathisers.
turbobloke said:
He was eventually sacked, arguably for different reasons, either way the drones that he sacked weren't unsacked after he left. It was the right thing to do and he did it. If more did the same as Gove we'd be well on the way.
the problem is where did they go ? just like social workers and senior managers in local councils that walk away with golden handshakes after major fk ups, they seem to reappear in similar roles in different organisations. they should be retrained to work in areas where they can no longer peddle their bks.wc98 said:
turbobloke said:
He was eventually sacked, arguably for different reasons, either way the drones that he sacked weren't unsacked after he left. It was the right thing to do and he did it. If more did the same as Gove we'd be well on the way.
the problem is where did they go ? just like social workers and senior managers in local councils that walk away with golden handshakes after major fk ups, they seem to reappear in similar roles in different organisations. they should be retrained to work in areas where they can no longer peddle their bks.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff