Nobody believes it on faith alone, its a hard fact. Had Darlings plans remained in place instead of being replaced by Osborne's for the past seven years then the debt would be higher. Because increased spending combined with lower deficit reduction results in higher debt accumulation.
Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th
- Thread starter Destination
- Start date
- Status
I'd certainly look forward to the visiting Chinese premiere sitting on a whoopie cushion during the televised state visit.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
Which is hilarious as the previous council was a Labour-Cons-Independent coalition. With STV in Scotland coalitions are the norm in local Govt.
Keynesian economics would have required running a surplus during the boom period, to allow for stimulus during the downturn.
The reason the deficit jumped so much to unsustainable levels when the economy crashed was because labour had been running a deficit since 2002.
If we're talking pictures that illustrate just how hateful the hard left Labourites are, I prefer this one:
How can there possibly be a moral case for inflicting harm on some that brings no benefit to others? Even when there is a benefit it still doesn't mean that it will be moral to do something, but when there's none at all...? What kind of a mindset thinks like that?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
The libdems blanket increase of 1p income tax seems fairer. Unsure which one will actually pull in more money for the gov.
No, they're that opposed to the SNP. Of course, that they'd be in power with all the goodies that entails is entirely irrelevant.
Are you saying that in the post war period, governments who mostly adopted Keyne's approach did so because they had been living through a boom time and stashed cash incase of the utter destruction of their infrastructure?
Are you saying the uk government ran a deficit in the post war years?
He's nailed on next PM
The choice between him and May is like the choice between lube or no lube.
There was a short period post war of deficit and continuing large inward investment and government intervention undertaken by most western european governments who adopted Keyne's approach not austerity.
You and ubersonic both seemingly ignore the idea that inward investment/government intervention can generate growth and prevent deficit as outlined by keynes and historic precedent and When you both bang on about pure deficit figures (noob 101 nonsense aside) you seemingly ignore debt to gdp (which I had to post to get the discussion on track).
Anyone stating as fact that should so and so been in charge and invested it would definitely be economically worse in the UK probably shouldn't bother debating.
I'll state I believe a more Keynesian led approach could have led us have better debt to gdp than the idealogical cuts of the tories and osborne. I wouldn't dream of stating such as fact though!
As for the 2008 crash being linked to the left idealogically, I guess Alan Greenspan's deregulation/laissez faire approach of the american banking sector (and sub prime especially) was the work of a pinko lefty trying to destroy free market capitalism from within?
You're going to get bummed either way, so you might as well vote for the person who might actually handle brexit with some kind of consideration for finance as opposed to the lunatic who thinks the world can run on fairy dust and unicorn farts.
You don't know your history very well.
Taken from http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_deficit_analysis
Your claims of stimulus aren't really borne out by the numbers. The closest is that the surplus was reduced at times, but it rarely went into deficit.
I also never blamed the left for the crash in 2008, I blamed them for the public spending problems, not the crash itself. Poor fiscal policy left us exposed when the crash came, it didn't cause it.
You'll need to define "post war years". Apart from three years under Atlee, you're right, they ran a surplus.
Last edited:
Have you been reading the graphs wrong again? That's the opposite of what happened.
I'm sorry, I completely garbled that reply. I meant to agree with your point, rather than your question. My bad. But, of course, in those years the state owned a significant chunk of the productive economy so the balance of payments was very different.
Feel free to inform me how the post war governments didn't stimulate, invest and rebuild during those periods. I'm not advocating increasing the deficit nor did they, I'm against ideological simplistic cuts which in terms of return's to the economy have clearly performed more poorly than the Governments predictions.
I believe Labour are advocating investing more into the UK's infrastructure as a means to grow and I haven't seen anything that suggests they were planning to do that by increasing the deficit either.
Frankly if you can accept the banking sector crash is not of the left, why you/we are splitting hairs over how much the UK spent on nurses the same year global banking nearly eat itself I don't know. The difference being the bankers are mostly better off, not sure about the nurses/police/teachers etc.
- Status