[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I know you think I'm stupid but I am actually not.

Yes there was a world-wide recession... and we were hit particularly hard in this country because the Labour government couldn't then, and have never been able to, balance the books.

Books were pretty balanced tbh before the global recession. Also banking crash would have hit us even harder had the Tories been in at the time as they actually wanted less regulation on the banks.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...s-8601390.html

Spoiler:

The overall picture is of a pre-recession Labour government whose borrowing and spending were sustainable and a post-recession Labour government that made more or less the right moves to stave off an even more calamitous downturn.

This is not to say that Gordon Brown et al got everything right. The Labour government presided over an era of irresponsibility in UK banking. However, the numbers show that their approach to spending and borrowing was actually sound. The irony is that Labour gets a lot of criticism for a crime of which they are innocent (spending too much) and hardly any at all for one of which they are guilty (not regulating the banks).

Reckless government borrowing and spending can indeed pitch countries into an economic crisis. But to co-opt this narrative to explain the UK's current situation is economically illiterate. The striking figures on leverage in the UK banking system show that the ones taking historically unprecedented risks with their finances were not politicians, but banking chiefs.

Excessive government borrowing did not get us into this mess. Falsely believing that it does covers all manners of sins when it comes to government spending cuts. Understanding the real causes behind the recession frees our political conversation. No longer should we be arguing about how deep the cuts should be, but whether we should be cutting at all.

Borrowing more and spending more are not the kamikaze strategies the Government would have us think. More government borrowing and spending now won't make things worse. In fact, the numbers suggest, there's a good chance it's the only thing likely to make things any better.

It gets rather annoying seeing Labour be blamed for something that happened worldwide. As if Labour are that powerful

Only real criticism I have of Labour is the war. And thats not even a labour thing, its a Blair thing. And Blairs 'New Labour' was closer to the tories than anything tbh. Labour is finally left again IMO. Other criticism thinking about it is not building more social housing, as thats caused a lot of the problems we have today. Selling off council houses (hen not replacing them) was ridiculous, though not sure which party actually started that.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Books were pretty balanced tbh before the global recession. Also banking crash would have hit us even harder had the Tories been in at the time as they actually wanted less regulation on the banks.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...s-8601390.html



It gets rather annoying seeing Labour be blamed for something that happened worldwide. As if Labour are that powerful

Only real criticism I have of Labour is the war. And thats not even a labour thing, its a Blair thing. And Blairs 'New Labour' was closer to the tories than anything tbh. Labour is finally left again IMO. Other criticism thinking about it is not building more social housing, as thats caused a lot of the problems we have today. Selling off council houses (hen not replacing them) was ridiculous, though not sure which party actually started that.

But Labour can't balance the books, generally. They get in, they overspend... they're voted out and the Tories get in... the Tories balance they make cuts and try to get spending under control... then Labour get in and spend all the money again. It's a never ending cycle.

And yeah, I have to agree that Thatcher's idea to sell off council houses was one in a long line of bad moves... and not replacing those that were sold was an even worse move.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

But Labour can't balance the books, generally. They get in, they overspend... they're voted out and the Tories get in... the Tories balance they make cuts and try to get spending under control... then Labour get in and spend all the money again. It's a never ending cycle.

And yeah, I have to agree that Thatcher's idea to sell off council houses was one in a long line of bad moves... and not replacing those that were sold was an even worse move.

How do you consider doubling the national debt not overspending?

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How do you consider doubling the national debt not overspending?

You can't get the National debt down until you get rid of the deficit.
Hence the more you spend the more debt will go up.
We pay approx Ł45-Ł50 billion a year interest, so best try to get it sorted whilst the interest RATE is reasonably low.
So unless we make cuts and live within our means it will just keep going up.
I reckon they could hike up the income tax but that would only lead to more moaning so it's a case of stuck between a rock and a hard place.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by smudgie

You can't get the National debt down until you get rid of the deficit.
Hence the more you spend the more debt will go up.
We pay approx Ł45-Ł50 billion a year interest, so best try to get it sorted whilst the interest RATE is reasonably low.
So unless we make cuts and live within our means it will just keep going up.
I reckon they could hike up the income tax but that would only lead to more moaning so it's a case of stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Main points
General government gross debt was Ł1,731.4 billion at the end of December 2016, equivalent to 89.3% of gross domestic product (GDP); an increase of Ł65.4 billion on December 2015.
The latest government debt figure exceeds the reference value of 60% of GDP set out in the Protocol on the Excessive Deficit Procedure; general government gross debt first exceeded the 60% Maastricht reference value at the end of 2009 when it was 64.5% of GDP or Ł979.8 billion.
General government deficit (or net borrowing) decreased by Ł24.2 billion to Ł57.2 billion (equivalent to 3.0% GDP) in 2016, compared with 2015.
The Protocol on the Excessive Deficit Procedure states that general government deficit should not exceed 3% of GDP; this is the first time the UK has met this requirement since 2007 when the deficit was 2.7% of GDP or Ł40.9 billion.

Then how has the deficit decreased and the debt increased?
This also shows the deficit was within range in 2007 and the debt was not out of the Maastricht reference value until 2009, therefor both well in range up to the end of the last govt.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gover...t/octtodec2016

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Then how has the deficit decreased and the debt increased?
This also shows the deficit was within range in 2007 and the debt was not out of the Maastricht reference value until 2009, therefor both well in range up to the end of the last govt.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gover...t/octtodec2016

In two words, interest and overspending.
The deficit is coming down due to less of an overspend than before.
The National debt will go up due to the billions we have to pay in interest every year. Plus the difference in the deficit balance we will have to borrow.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by smudgie

In two words, interest and overspending.
The deficit is coming down due to less of an overspend than before.
The National debt will go up due to the billions we have to pay in interest every year. Plus the difference in the deficit balance we will have to borrow.

Sorry that makes no sense we reduced the deficit by 24 billion in a year but accrued 65 billion in debt?... nah :/

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

But Labour can't balance the books, generally. They get in, they overspend... they're voted out and the Tories get in... the Tories balance they make cuts and try to get spending under control... then Labour get in and spend all the money again. It's a never ending cycle.

And yeah, I have to agree that Thatcher's idea to sell off council houses was one in a long line of bad moves... and not replacing those that were sold was an even worse move.

I agree its a never ending cycle, but see it the opposite way to you. Tories cut vital services and take too much away from the poorest in society, then labour get in and restore the funding that should not have been cut in the first place, which looks like they are overspending. Tories in, cuts. Labour in, reversing

Austerity is a totally idealistic pile of nonsense. The cuts they are making now aren't needed. The country would have recovered faster without the endless cuts. The country is recovering in spite of the Tories, not because of. Add the Brexit nonsense onto this and we will be ****ed again. It will be ridiculously expensive to get out IMO. This is why I am glad the Tories are still in charge to sort out their own mess. If labour had got in this election...they would have been forever blamed for the huge black hole brexit causes in our finances. Like they are blamed for the global recession.

The main problem I see honestly, that noone seems prepared to begin to tackle (though May did try with her manifesto and was slaughtered for it) is the aging population. The ridiculous promise of triple lock, fuel payments to millionaires and so on. We have too many old people. They are not contributing and the younger taxpayers are strained to pay for them all. I don't know the answer mind, but May was heading in the right direction with the 'cruel dementia tax'. Its unfair to expect younger taxpayers who are already in poverty to pay for older people who can afford to pay for themselves. Yes this may be a step towards privatization...but we simply cannot go on the way we are. Noone will seriously tackle it though as it is election suicide. have to lick up the pensioners arses to even stand a chance, and expect them to pay for something themselves doesn't go down well..as May found out