Tory lies over borrowing

[pcvdriver]

It's been done to death on here about how Labour are the one's to borrow and borrow and that the country's finances were in a shocking state due to the level of their borrowing. However if you look at Government borrowing from 1997 when Labour took power, until today in 2014 you will notice it's jump from below 50% of GDP in 1997 to just over 50% in 2010 when the Tories/Libs took over to nearly 80% of GDP today in 2014. Yet public services budgets are still being slashed to the bone, how can they claim to being prudent with the nation's purse-strings?.....if spending now is at an all time high under their ineffectual, elitist policies.

Link - http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7568/debt/govern...

[pcvdriver]

simoid said:

What's your point?

The Tories should spend more?

Yes, they should have. Especially on environmental issues....there was no need to have slashed the budgets so severely. The cut-backs caused everyone to panic and not spend like they were previously - further stifling the recovery of the economy.

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.

simoid said:

Labour didn't spend too much?

Not going by previous Government borrowing/spending levels, no they didn't. Where Labour let down the country badly was the relaxing banking regs. but who's to say the Tories wouldn't have done exactly the same if asked by their buddies in BIG business?

simoid said:

Labour spent too much?

Not at all - quite modest spending by 20th Century standards.

simoid said:

Labour should be brought back in to spend more money?

Preferable to the Tories, as long as someone more effective than Ed Miliband is at the helm.

simoid said:

There isn't a problem with debt/deficit?

Obviously there are issues - but not as great as was claimed by Oily Dave and Oilier than thou Gidiot.

simoid said:

Austerity is a lie to take money from the poor and give to the rich?

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.

[pcvdriver]

TheEnd said:

Lies, damn lies, and statistics was the phrase.



I'd always tend to measure borrowing in terms of £'s, not % of earnings.

If not taken as a percentage of what was actually earned - then relatively speaking, one cannot truly make a comparison as to what could be afforded, or not - as the case may be.

[pcvdriver]

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.