Good old Vince.
Discussion
Vince Cable set the cat among pigeons yesterday announcing the need, in his opinion, for the Government to start infrastructure projects such as housing, transport projects. We should take advantage of the low interest rates for finance. Of course this is going right up against the current Government Policies in respect of finance for such projects and his announcement just prior to the Budget is bound to bring a twinge of embarrassment to Osbourn/Cameron.
Lib-Dem now starting to distance themselves regarding policy for the G.E.?
Lib-Dem now starting to distance themselves regarding policy for the G.E.?
Forgive me, but is the govt not committed to new infrastructure projects then?
Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
DJRC said:
Forgive me, but is the govt not committed to new infrastructure projects then?
Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
IMO one of the biggest barriers to infrastructure projects is NIMBYism.Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
I'm absolutely sick to death of Prince Charles types demanding that the country must resemble a twee little chocolate box stuck visually in the late Forties/early Fifties. We must protect the countryside, but we must also improve our infrastructure and build houses suited to modern living, otherwise we'll end up properly stuck in the Fifties while the rest of the world moves on.
chrisw666 said:
If we use public money to stimulate builders making stuff, do we then need to use public money to give other people jobs so they can buy the stuff the builders make?
They're getting the jobs. Employment is up. Problem is, thanks to a chronic lack of investment in housing during the New Labour years, houses are in short supply and the market dynamics of that have made them too expensive for what they are.Thankfully the government is doing something about it with FirstBuy, but we still need a lot more houses.
Twincam16 said:
DJRC said:
Forgive me, but is the govt not committed to new infrastructure projects then?
Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
IMO one of the biggest barriers to infrastructure projects is NIMBYism.Look around the country sometime. There is more new housing being built and brought to the market than at anytime in the last 5 yrs. Rail has had MASSIVE injections of investment and new rail infrastructure is currently the subject of a rather bitter battle. There was massive capital investment into London for the Olympics before the election and continued after it.
The govt announced the largest rail investment in a century and half the country exploded in anger!
I'm absolutely sick to death of Prince Charles types demanding that the country must resemble a twee little chocolate box stuck visually in the late Forties/early Fifties. We must protect the countryside, but we must also improve our infrastructure and build houses suited to modern living, otherwise we'll end up properly stuck in the Fifties while the rest of the world moves on.
Something needs to be done in London, there just isn't enough housing to meet demand. Hence why there are people living in garden sheds for £500 a month.
Borrow more money to get yourself out of the brown stuff? Genius...
I've posted this before, but Japan have been trying to do that for over 20 years.
I've posted this before, but Japan have been trying to do that for over 20 years.
Investing in infrastructure is good, end of discussion.
However, not all spending on transport and infrastructure is an investment. This is the key fact. Projects need to have a demand and a prospect of use/return to be classed as such.
Getting the goods and workers moving around an economy is obviously, clearly a good thing - imagine a workplace (any workplace) where everyone's shoelaces are tied together if you can't see why - so projects need to have a genuine demand to meet and/or congestion to relieve and be a medium to long-term solution, rather than a temporary sticking plaster, like the M6 toll for example.
However, not all spending on transport and infrastructure is an investment. This is the key fact. Projects need to have a demand and a prospect of use/return to be classed as such.
Getting the goods and workers moving around an economy is obviously, clearly a good thing - imagine a workplace (any workplace) where everyone's shoelaces are tied together if you can't see why - so projects need to have a genuine demand to meet and/or congestion to relieve and be a medium to long-term solution, rather than a temporary sticking plaster, like the M6 toll for example.
Twincam16 said:
They're getting the jobs. Employment is up. Problem is, thanks to a chronic lack of investment in housing during the New Labour years, houses are in short supply and the market dynamics of that have made them too expensive for what they are.
Thankfully the government is doing something about it with FirstBuy, but we still need a lot more houses.
I'm not sure meaningful, well paid full time employment is up. It certainly isn't as you move away from the large cities and as much as people cite housing as the magic pill it isn't. Thankfully the government is doing something about it with FirstBuy, but we still need a lot more houses.
wolves_wanderer said:
Nobody has been able to explain why borrowing an extra (say) £20bn will stimulate the economy when the massive deficit we already run, apparently does not.
Current GDP is merely propped up by current spending/deficit levels. Infrastructure would theoretically increase GDP further and lift a few more bods off the dole queues.However, IMHO, the best, the only reason to 'invest' in infrastrucure is to commit to projects that have a clear purpose and will clearly reduce congestion and transit times within the economy. End of.
crankedup said:
Vince Cable set the cat among pigeons yesterday announcing the need, in his opinion, for the Government to start infrastructure projects such as housing, transport projects. We should take advantage of the low interest rates for finance. Of course this is going right up against the current Government Policies in respect of finance for such projects and his announcement just prior to the Budget is bound to bring a twinge of embarrassment to Osbourn/Cameron.
Lib-Dem now starting to distance themselves regarding policy for the G.E.?
I think Nick Robinsons analysis is quite interesting too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21697483Lib-Dem now starting to distance themselves regarding policy for the G.E.?
This would suggest that Mr Cables speech is hardly a "cat amongst the pigeons" moment as you describe Cranky. Given that over the past 12 months or so, the Government has already announced a number of major infrastructure projects I suspect Mr Cables speech indicates a debate over pace, rather than policy at the heart of Government.
Mr Cable is also at pains to point out that the economy is different now compared to 2010, so this is most definately NOT an endorsement of Ed Balls economic (disaster) plan.
Mr Cameron will be pointing out what he will no doubt call the green shoots of recovery - Falling unemployment (with most new jobs being FULL time, not part time as the leftists would have us believe) growing manufacturing sector (something we all want) and growing exports to important (for the future) new markets.
Of course, the doldrums in Eurozone will hold UK recovery back somewhat, and the situation in the USA is also unhelpful, but if by this time next year we have had a percent or twos growth, continues falling unemployment, continued deficit reduction and continued low inflation then maybe, just maybe the coalition parties will each be in a position to point to the good they have done together after the car crash that was the Labour years. For all the comments in the HYS section of the BBC website I do detect a grudging acceptance by most people that borrowing your way out of debt is not the answer to the UKs problems. And for all the banker bashing, most people I speak to do actually recognise that Labour policies contributed hugely to the mess we are in today. I could be wrong, (not an unknown phenomenon) but it's still 2 years to the GE, and I wouldn't be writing the Tories off just yet.
Vince however needs to be careful lest he be seen to be neither fish nor fowl - if he accidently allows himself to be seen to be endorsing Ed Balls policies he will be toast politically!
RSoovy4 said:
Brilliant.
The household is in debt it can't pay.
Solution - borrow more.
Idiots.
Why is it that the gubberment sees fit to attack payday loan companies, and then Vince the knob is telling us in the same breath that the country needs one.
Prick.
Would you like £200 in your account by 2pm, text Yes to 66666 if you would like to borrow this interest rate 6584% aprThe household is in debt it can't pay.
Solution - borrow more.
Idiots.
Why is it that the gubberment sees fit to attack payday loan companies, and then Vince the knob is telling us in the same breath that the country needs one.
Prick.
MX7 said:
Borrow more money to get yourself out of the brown stuff? Genius...
I've posted this before, but Japan have been trying to do that for over 20 years.
Perhaps in the end we will have the libdums to thank. Japan had got its sI've posted this before, but Japan have been trying to do that for over 20 years.
t together 20 years ago so there is nothing to invest in than can improve the economy. We on the other hand are so completely wrong in every aspect of how our country is managed that there is loads of scope for change which will improve our economic performance. All of Cables ideas will be rubbish cos he is an idiot (I have met him and he definitely is). The basic idea though of improving infrastructure is a good one. Fast transport links built quickly by arresting the objectors for treason would relieve the pressure on housing in London without having to throw up concrete boxes. There are houses for sale all over the UK for sod all because of Libdum councils "anti car policy" There are social workers to sack. Useless schoolteachers to retrain, many many quangos to scrap. Failed regulators to redeploy, maybe even as free labour for the road building gangs. We subsidise charities that support anti economic performance measures like speed cameras and silly childish vehicle destruction humps. We could stop that by scrapping the bus subsidies. The state of the infrastructure is so bad that the military could be brought in to blow large chunks of it up prior to redeploying most of the civil service to get their hands dirty rebuilding it. And you know what if we just admitted this is a state of emergency and got on with whats needed the stress levels of the former public sector workers would fall and the whole country would be a happier friendlier place. The UK no limits.munky said:
Yes, but i've been to Poundbury, which is Prince Charles' pet housing project in Dorset. It is modern housing, designed to look old, and all the houses are slighly different. And so it manages to not look like concrete blocks, identikit glass towers, or dismal housing estates. It is essentially a village or small town, with a town square and a village shop. It's worth a look.
Something needs to be done in London, there just isn't enough housing to meet demand. Hence why there are people living in garden sheds for £500 a month.
Poundbury is a very "Marmite" place; personally I really like it and although the concept might be slightly flawed in its execution at least the PoW is actually trying to do something about a subject he clearly feels passionate about.Something needs to be done in London, there just isn't enough housing to meet demand. Hence why there are people living in garden sheds for £500 a month.
My girlfriend lives in one of the villages on the outskirts of Dorchester and really dislikes the place - as I said "Marmite"
IroningMan said:
Poundbury is an odd place: I'm not sure what it is that feels wrong - perhaps it's the utter lack of mature trees: doesn't help that it's in such an exposed spot.
Yes! I completely agree actually. Although I like it, there is an oddness about it that I couldn't quite put my finger on. Doesn't feel quite real. A bit like those films where the place looks normal except everyone has died. Maybe everyone was at work - can't remember what day of the week it was when I was there. Maybe it was that they were still building houses there, or that it starts abruptly at an A-road roundabout, and ends quite abrubtly where Dorchester starts.. it doesn't taper out like a real village, it just stops. Or maybe it's an odd mix of styles that don't belong together - townhouses in a village setting, townhouses with little front gardens and parking bays outside (I'm used to London's Georgian townhouses which of course were built before cars, and don't have front gardens). Or maybe it's too ordered, too planned. Or maybe it just hasn't weathered yet - it's old style, but doesn't look old yet. Here's a streetview linkStill, it's a good effort, much better than some of our other new towns, such as Harlow or MK.
Twincam16 said:
They're getting the jobs. Employment is up. Problem is, thanks to a chronic lack of investment in housing during the New Labour years, houses are in short supply and the market dynamics of that have made them too expensive for what they are.
Thankfully the government is doing something about it with FirstBuy, but we still need a lot more houses.
Or a lot less people......Thankfully the government is doing something about it with FirstBuy, but we still need a lot more houses.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff