George Osbourne is dillusional
Discussion
oyster said:
It's funny you say this, whilst most of those same families will still jump in the car for a 1 mile trip to the supermarket.
Fuel isn't expensive.
Always amuses me to hear people moaning about the cost of fuel over a grande latte. That's not to say we wouldn't benefit from fuel being cheaper, I just think people have a skewed view of the price versus the utility they get for that price. A litre of half decent fruit juice is more expensive! I think the real issue is we've all grown up being used to cheap and abundant energy and the mobile consumer lifestyle it enables, and have come to view that as "normality" when it clearly isn't. Framed in that way, you could argue we're not seeing a fall in standard of living, we're simply seeing a reversion to the mean. Less votes to be won with that argument mind you.Fuel isn't expensive.
HundredthIdiot said:
According to your profile you run a 5 litre TVR.
Whilst your taste in cars is impeccable, the assertion that your fuel costs are an "essential expense" is not likely to get much support from the Dacia-driving masses.
Thanks! thats my Sunday car, my post wasnt personal or hypocryitical I refer to the money I put in the family Audi A1 dowgraded from the range rover as it was ridiculous and a waste ,the TVR has been sold sadly going on Saturday am now looking for a Griff I think.Whilst your taste in cars is impeccable, the assertion that your fuel costs are an "essential expense" is not likely to get much support from the Dacia-driving masses.
Anyway how does my car choice affect Osbournes dillusionment!
George Osbourne is entirely under qualified to understand the technical detailery of the job he is employed to do. He was a history graduate (a not very successfull one) he then failed at career in journalism and through nepitism and connections gained a job as an "researcher" at Conservative party HQ.
Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
mattnunn said:
George Osbourne is entirely under qualified to understand the technical detailery of the job he is employed to do. He was a history graduate (a not very successfull one) he then failed at career in journalism and through nepitism and connections gained a job as an "researcher" at Conservative party HQ.
Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
I think, we are begining to see, the people who have been at the contrl of our economy have, for decades, lacked adult supervision and a grasp of the very basics of sustainable finances.Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
mattnunn said:
George Osbourne is entirely under qualified to understand the technical detailery of the job he is employed to do. He was a history graduate (a not very successfull one) he then failed at career in journalism and through nepitism and connections gained a job as an "researcher" at Conservative party HQ.
Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
Funny enough some one I sold a vehicle to knew him and said he was a complete cock,he like most today falls short and drops into the "Tory toff" cliche perfectly,we need someone with a bit of gravitas hence my original leaning toward Nigel Farrage who at least talks the talk.As for Milliband him?? run England PLC an utterly ridiculous thought it wont ever happen.......Now I'm not suggesting that he's stupid, you need to judge that for your self based on the state of the nations finances, and I'm not suggesting a democratic government of the people would be best served by technocrats, but a man of his position should at least have the prerequisite intellectual tools to understand the role that 35 years of fagging and arse licking have delivered him.
mattnunn said:
George Osbourne is entirely under qualified to understand the technical detailery of the job he is employed to do. He was a history graduate (a not very successfull one) he then failed at career in journalism and through nepitism and connections gained a job as an "researcher" at Conservative party HQ.
What counts as qualified to understand the technical details of the job?If it is a degree in Economics then the last Chancellor that was qualified for the job was Norman Lamont.
It also means that we should have absolute faith in the dynamic duo of Miliband and Balls (as long as we forget how well they advised Gordon Brown).
Gary11 said:
Anyway how does my car choice affect Osbournes dillusionment!
They are both matters of economic judgement. On paper, buying a depreciating asset you seldom use doesn't seem like a sound economic move. I'm sure you can defend your choices, but as we've seen from the aftermath of the rating downgrade, so can Osborne. You may not agree with his defence, and indeed may even make up words to describe it, but then other people (possibly not on PH) might suggest your car buying behaviour is deluded.The biggest problem with any Chancellor is that the policies are really 5 year time horizons only.
A seperate body should set the state pension so 100 year policies etc
Maybe we should work with a setup where by the govt are given £x to spend and the tax revenue is all done for them ie flat tax simple tax system if they need more they up the % or decrease the tax free element.
Dead simple and forces them to work within the constraints of the long term.
A seperate body should set the state pension so 100 year policies etc
Maybe we should work with a setup where by the govt are given £x to spend and the tax revenue is all done for them ie flat tax simple tax system if they need more they up the % or decrease the tax free element.
Dead simple and forces them to work within the constraints of the long term.
Super Slo Mo said:
Four Litre said:
Super Slo Mo said:
'We' didn't sell them to the Indians. They haven't been in British hands for a long, long time.
Simple fact is, under the current ownership, the factories remain here in the UK, providing much needed jobs and associated resources to the local communities (parts suppliers, catering, etc). If they'd stayed in British hands, chances are neither company would exist today.
The fact that a small amount of the turnover (profit) goes to the parent company is worth it, IMO, due to the huge value to the economy of keeping both Jaguar and LR in the UK.
Give that a few more years, once knowledge transfer has been completed,the factory will shut, machinery shipped off and to sunny India the jobs will go. Its happened it IT (and still is) and will happen to pretty much everything else that can be KT'd!Simple fact is, under the current ownership, the factories remain here in the UK, providing much needed jobs and associated resources to the local communities (parts suppliers, catering, etc). If they'd stayed in British hands, chances are neither company would exist today.
The fact that a small amount of the turnover (profit) goes to the parent company is worth it, IMO, due to the huge value to the economy of keeping both Jaguar and LR in the UK.
Wy do you think Tata bought JLR? Tata have been making cars and tricks for years in India. They bought JLR for its technical expertise,K and make no mistake, that expertise will gradually be soaked up by Indian engineers and production will be moved abroad. Most of their sales go to the East, in fact JLR are already looking at building a factory in China.
Why did BMW buy Rolls Royce? Why did VW buy Bentley? A Rolls Royce is a BMW 7 series with a pretty dress on. The same goes for Bentley, Audi underpinnings with a pretty Bentley dress on. The Germans make the cake, and we put a bit of icing on the cake so it can sell at double the price.
This UK is in decline, but it is not alone. Western economies have huge Public sectors and Welfare to pay for - a sign of a civilised society - the India'a and China's of the world do not, we are falling towards their level, they are rising towards our level. Once an equilibrium is reached, we can start competing on a level playing field, but only if we still we have a manufacturing industry and qualified engineers in place.
ralphrj said:
What counts as qualified to understand the technical details of the job?
If it is a degree in Economics then the last Chancellor that was qualified for the job was Norman Lamont.
Wasn't he the one that had to hold a paper cup up to the side of his head when he spoke? On spitting image? If it is a degree in Economics then the last Chancellor that was qualified for the job was Norman Lamont.
Did he enjoy being fisted?
I'm not sure about delusional, but I would go along with woefully optimistic. Yes his hands are tied by the coalition, by the modest mandate they sought at the last election and by the lack of any public appetite for meaningful reforms. However he is not compelled to keep lying about the prospects for future growth and stability, which are minimal until the burden of taxation is reduced and the incredible level of borrowing is reigned in.
It's no good putting it all down to cheap labour in Asia or the vagaries of the American stock market, because they are beyond what we can possibly control. Until our own house is in order it's just an excuse.
And this is the whole problem with the Conservative party and it's supporters. They refuse to be honest lest it cost them votes, and so get themselves into an insane situation where they have the power they crave and are absolutely unable to do anything remotely conservative with it. They, and the country as a whole, would have been far better off taking a principled stand in 2010 and saying a conservative government would make the meaningful cuts and the drastic reforms, even if it meant another 5 years of Labour. After the chaos and misery Labour's continued profligacy would inevitably cause they would be now riding a wave of public enthusiasm for reduced spending, and be able to plan real cuts for 2015 when they would have had a majority.
It's no good putting it all down to cheap labour in Asia or the vagaries of the American stock market, because they are beyond what we can possibly control. Until our own house is in order it's just an excuse.
And this is the whole problem with the Conservative party and it's supporters. They refuse to be honest lest it cost them votes, and so get themselves into an insane situation where they have the power they crave and are absolutely unable to do anything remotely conservative with it. They, and the country as a whole, would have been far better off taking a principled stand in 2010 and saying a conservative government would make the meaningful cuts and the drastic reforms, even if it meant another 5 years of Labour. After the chaos and misery Labour's continued profligacy would inevitably cause they would be now riding a wave of public enthusiasm for reduced spending, and be able to plan real cuts for 2015 when they would have had a majority.
Welshbeef said:
The biggest problem with any Chancellor is that the policies are really 5 year time horizons only.
A seperate body should set the state pension so 100 year policies etc
Maybe we should work with a setup where by the govt are given £x to spend and the tax revenue is all done for them ie flat tax simple tax system if they need more they up the % or decrease the tax free element.
Dead simple and forces them to work within the constraints of the long term.
I very much agree with your broad sentiments here.A seperate body should set the state pension so 100 year policies etc
Maybe we should work with a setup where by the govt are given £x to spend and the tax revenue is all done for them ie flat tax simple tax system if they need more they up the % or decrease the tax free element.
Dead simple and forces them to work within the constraints of the long term.
The short-termism on business and employment taxes is also creates a very tough environment for the private sector.
hornet said:
They are both matters of economic judgement. On paper, buying a depreciating asset you seldom use doesn't seem like a sound economic move. I'm sure you can defend your choices, but as we've seen from the aftermath of the rating downgrade, so can Osborne. You may not agree with his defence, and indeed may even make up words to describe it, but then other people (possibly not on PH) might suggest your car buying behaviour is deluded.
Hi I see where your coming from but in this instance it doesnt work as an analagy, as the car actually is and has appreciated and most automotive things I buy or sell manage to turn a profit one way or the other unlike GO.G
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff