Lib-Dems accept defeat on Lords:

Mr Jack said:
The first recession was Brown's recession. The double dip is all down to Osborne. As for your laughable notion that the UK is doing better than most country's that's just plain counter-factual; we're not even keeping up with the Eurozone average!
Click to expand...

Last time I looked the only EU country doing better than us was Germany, we were ahead of France despite the fact we shouldn't be and US politicians were praising our governments handling of affairs. As somebody who travels extensively through the EU for work I can tell you if you think things look bleak/austere here you would hate to see the rest of Europe right now.
 
ubersonic said:
Last time I looked the only EU country doing better than us was Germany, we were ahead of France despite the fact we shouldn't be and US politicians were praising our governments handling of affairs. As somebody who travels extensively through the EU for work I can tell you if you think things look bleak/austere here you would hate to see the rest of Europe right now.
Click to expand...

Which is why we should get the hell out of it before it consumes us with its road to oblivion.
 
Hatter The Mad said:
How can you be that blinkered, seriously, to call the recession's Brown's making when almost all of the world went into recession? We have our disagreements, but I expected better of you.
Click to expand...

The depth and nature of the recession was down to Brown's management of the economy as was the lack of reserves for a response when it happened. I don't blame New Labour entirely for the recession, global factors were hugely important but we had a significant influence over those global factors (the UK is a huge player in the financial markets) and the exposure of the banks to the failings of the global financial markets was allowed to reach terrifying levels because of failures in regulation under Brown's watch.

To be fair, they did act swiftly and effectively when the crunch hit. Brown does deserve some credit for that.

The double dip cannot be pinned on Osborne either. What exactly do you expect him to do? Not only that, but there wouldn't even be a double-dip recession (which essentially doesn't mean anything when we're talking about fractions of GDP with big statistical error) without the first recession.
Click to expand...

The margin of error on the GDP figures is smaller than the degree of drop. Osborne's policies have, according to the IMF, reduced UK growth by 2.5% - enough to make the difference between recession and not. What I'd have liked to have seen him do is adopt a growth first plan, rather than a cut first plan, and not put quite so much effort into talking down the UK economy and up the problems we face. His political need to drive the "austerity" agenda has sapped the economy of much needed confidence.
 
Tefal said:
couldn't he have got rid of him?
Click to expand...
Not at that point - Blair was too politically weak and needed Brown's support for/during Iraq.

Given that Blair left in 2007 when he didn't want to (was forced out), and that the Brownites took over the party in 2001 kind of indicates exactly how much power he and his cabal had.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
Last time I looked the only EU country doing better than us was Germany, we were ahead of France despite the fact we shouldn't be and US politicians were praising our governments handling of affairs.
Click to expand...

List of GDP growth rates by country

Hatter The Mad said:
Might you not be falling foul of a statistical fallacy (regression towards the mean) when comparing rates of growth like that?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think so. Firstly, it's really not clear to me that any regression to the mean effect is going to apply to a system like GDP growth, perhaps you can explain why you think it should? Secondly, the GDP fall of the Eurozone was less than the fall in the UK so any regression to the mean effect should operate in the opposite direction.
 
Mr Jack said:
To be fair, they did act swiftly and effectively when the crunch hit. Brown does deserve some credit for that.
Click to expand...
They did anything but :confused:

The margin of error on the GDP figures is smaller than the degree of drop. Osborne's policies have, according to the IMF, reduced UK growth by 2.5% - enough to make the difference between recession and not.
Click to expand...
I think you've taken that figure out of context (and not least seem too deeply wedded to the fallacy that is 'any GDP is good GDP').
 
Hatter The Mad said:
They did anything but :confused:
Click to expand...

Brown and Darling's actions on the banks saved a total collapse, that's what I'm talking about.

I think you've taken that figure out of context (and not least seem too deeply wedded to the fallacy that is 'any GDP is good GDP').
Click to expand...

I don't believe any GDP is good GDP - the top contender for bad growth being the distortion led by the City during the good years - I do believe that taking money out of a struggling economy is a stupidly ill-judged and ultimately self-defeating move.
 
Mr Jack said:
Brown and Darling's actions on the banks saved a total collapse, that's what I'm talking about.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. They were anything but swift. Only when it hit the fan did they start to act (actually, a bit beyond it). It isn't a joke or Tory exaggeration that Brown was in denial - he was in denial about the banks and about the UK economy. I recommend reading End of the Party and/or Back from the Brink.


I don't believe any GDP is good GDP - the top contender for bad growth being the distortion led by the City during the good years - I do believe that taking money out of a struggling economy is a stupidly ill-judged and ultimately self-defeating move.
Click to expand...
The money supply in the economy has only really gone up, and how is 'reducing spending increase' taking money out of the economy? Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying (ie are you going all libertarian on me and complaining about increased taxes? ;))
 
Last edited:
I think we're pretty much retreading the same ground on the economy as we've been over in a dozen threads by now. I tire of it :)

So let's return to the original topic: I've been reading reaction from the Tory blogs. Here's some of the better posts I've found.

Tories haven't welched, the Lib Dems have
LibDem promises spin unravels
Clegg porky pied on tuition fees, does the same on boundary changes
No more Lords reform and a dwindling hope for a Tory majority

Although not related to the current mess, I also found this one very interesting: The Tories are lucky to be governing in coalition
 
ubersonic said:
That just shows the % increase/decrease for the year not total GDP. My friend is 5 inches taller than me, if he loses an inch hes still taller than me. This graph is better:

http://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/...TUR:UKR&ifdim=region&hl=en_US&dl=en&ind=false
Click to expand...

Yeah, %age comparisons are absolutely the thing you need to compare if you're comparing countries, otherwise the larger size of the UK economy completely distorts things. If you think about it, growth or the reverse thereof is composed of the individual changes of the many companies that make up the economy of a country. Looking at absolute values simply confuses the number of companies with their actual performance.
 
Mr Jack said:
Yeah, %age comparisons are absolutely the thing you need to compare if you're comparing countries, otherwise the larger size of the UK economy completely distorts things.
Click to expand...

%age comparisons between countries are pointless as due to differing economy/population sizes they will show X country doing better of than Y country when it isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom