Westminster Politics

Ekkie Thump

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
3,892
Supports
Leeds United
11101 said:
The US dwarfs the UK for lending and insurance, it was both hit less and recovered faster. I was working in the industry at the time and everybody knew problems were being stored up with some of the products we were layering on top of each other but every year the regulations would be loosened a bit to help the gravy train carry on. Some properly exotic products were being traded in London because nowhere else would allow them.

My thoughts are simple. Blair did a decent job, Gordon Brown was a disaster. He loaded us up with too much bloat and debt for the size of the economy. Austerity was necessary for a period of time but we should have dropped it in the mid 2010s.
Click to expand...
Bolded doesn't seem to be the case; at least not as a share of the overall economy, which is the most important metric for comparison.

On "dwarfing":​
  • Financial services and associated industries represented a maximum of 7.6% of the US economy in 2007 (Q1). In the UK it represented 8.8% (pg 9)
  • OECD suggests that in 2007 household debt was 175% of income in the UK compared to 144% across the pond.
On "too much bloat and debt":​
US did not undergo austerity. UK did. US recovered faster you say?
 
Last edited:

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,255
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Not really. The country was in rude national health at the end of that 13 year period. Pretty much everything worked as well as it’s ever done. That probably not saying much, but they should have been the first 13 years of a good run. We needed left wing opposition to a fairly centre left Labour Party that demanded even more for the people.

Instead, we had an ungrateful populace that fell for Cameron’s bollocks. It happens every single time. The people in this country are poorly informed of politics, economics and when paired with the media and bad faith actors in the Tory party… they vote against their own best interests so often.

British people are kind, compassionate, but they are easily led. They focus on the micro day to day of their own lives and even when it’s good, they’re gullible at the macro level. Towns where only ‘The Good Immigrants’ exist, as doctors and nurses and dentists, that see them not have to wait for services… will buy into macro dramas about immigration and pick up a pitchfork. They can have a child in a school rated ‘Good’ that’s raising middle England economy drones where they all get ten GCSE’s and have among the highest percentage of children going on to Uni… and get corrupted by the threat of unisex toilets, or that children at the school are soon to identify as cats.

They routinely vote for a party that makes everything worse. Every. Single. Time.

It’ll happen again. No question.
Click to expand...
Well it obviously doesn't happen every time because Blair won three successive elections. There is a lot in what you're saying in general but your conclusion 'It’ll happen again. No question' is simply wrong. It might happen again yes, or we might see a repeat of Blair's wins, or Wilson's. They both had everything against them too, but still won again.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,236
Location
Blitztown
11101 said:
The US dwarfs the UK for lending and insurance, it was both hit less and recovered faster. I was working in the industry at the time and everybody knew problems were being stored up with some of the products we were layering on top of each other but every year the regulations would be loosened a bit to help the gravy train carry on. Some properly exotic products were being traded in London because nowhere else would allow them.

My thoughts are simple. Blair did a decent job, Gordon Brown was a disaster. He loaded us up with too much bloat and debt for the size of the economy. Austerity was necessary for a period of time but we should have dropped it in the mid 2010s.
Click to expand...
The UK didn’t recover as fast BECAUSE of the thing you think was a good idea. It wasn’t. If you’re allowed to describe the Labour relaxing of regulations as a factor… what the hell kind of nutty bucket do you put Forever-Austerity in?

Honestly.
 

Jericholyte2

Full Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
3,564
11101 said:
The US dwarfs the UK for lending and insurance, it was both hit less and recovered faster. I was working in the industry at the time and everybody knew problems were being stored up with some of the products we were layering on top of each other but every year the regulations would be loosened a bit to help the gravy train carry on. Some properly exotic products were being traded in London because nowhere else would allow them.

My thoughts are simple. Blair did a decent job, Gordon Brown was a disaster. He loaded us up with too much bloat and debt for the size of the economy. Austerity was necessary for a period of time but we should have dropped it in the mid 2010s.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but what planet are you living on?!?

1. Brown had a plan that he took to a hesitant EU and had them all agreeing to it, before a combination of Tory & media lies blamed him for the economic crisis.

2. Debt as a % of GDP continued to grow consistently between 2010 and the Brexit referendum, even as A&E units, schools, libraries, sure start centres were being closed and the police force was decimated of experienced staff.

In no way was austerity needed or justified. As others said this path put billions in the pockets of people who already had billions in the bank whilst rendering the country a husk, just about able to limp along so long as nothing like a global pandemic or a war broke out.
 

Peter van der Gea

Likes Pineapple on well done Steak
Joined
Feb 17, 2018
Messages
3,700
I was studying a degree in economics while Brown was Chancellor, including the history of economics, I am of the opinion that Brown was one of the best Chancellors the UK has had.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,255
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
Peter van der Gea said:
I was studying a degree in economics while Brown was Chancellor, including the history of economics, I am of the opinion that Brown was one of the best Chancellors the UK has had.
Click to expand...
Most economists at home and certainly abroad agree.

Some of the criticisms from both right and left are based on unknowns. We know the strategy of QE and interest rates was Brown's, he convinced the US and Europe to follow it and so avoided a mega-recession. We know had he retained power he intended an austerity budget to hammer that policy home. What we don't know is what he would have done in subsequent years, or how long the austerity would have lasted. Personally I do not think he would have maintained it in the way the Tories have for so long, I think he would have switched to growth as soon as he believed he could, but who knows.
 

Spark

Full Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
2,271
711 said:
Most economists at home and certainly abroad agree.

Some of the criticisms from both right and left are based on unknowns. We know the strategy of QE and interest rates was Brown's, he convinced the US and Europe to follow it and so avoided a mega-recession. We know had he retained power he intended an austerity budget to hammer that policy home. What we don't know is what he would have done in subsequent years, or how long the austerity would have lasted. Personally I do not think he would have maintained it in the way the Tories have for so long, I think he would have switched to growth as soon as he believed he could, but who knows.
Click to expand...
Austerity was (and still is) ideologically driven by the tories, with a long line of targeted cuts disproportionally targeting the poorest. To no ones surprise, that has absolutely fecked the majority in this country over the last 14 years.

It’s a great shame Brown didn’t call an early election, as I think it would have been more favourable to Labour. There would certainly have been cuts, but I doubt it would have been called anything like “austerity”.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,255
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
Spark said:
Austerity was (and still is) ideologically driven by the tories, with a long line of targeted cuts disproportionally targeting the poorest. To no ones surprise, that has absolutely fecked the majority in this country over the last 14 years.

It’s a great shame Brown didn’t call an early election, as I think it would have been more favourable to Labour. There would certainly have been cuts, but I doubt it would have been called anything like “austerity”.
Click to expand...
As you say yourself 'there would certainly have been cuts'. If you want to quibble about the word austerity then fair enough, my point was that Brown would have started with cuts but I believe he would not have kept that up over time as the Tories have.
 

Spark

Full Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
2,271
711 said:
As you say yourself 'there would certainly have been cuts'. If you want to quibble about the word austerity then fair enough, my point was that Brown would have started with cuts but I believe he would not have kept that up over time as the Tories have.
Click to expand...
I wasn't disagreeing with you btw. More that "Austerity" is a slogan that was promoted specifically by David Cameron and the conservatives to instigate an ideologically motivated transfer of wealth from the poorest to the richest. It's hinted at in that article linked with Cameron and Osborne calling Brown and Darling's 50p tax rate "distraction burglary".

Had Brown been PM there would have been cuts, but I strongly believe (as you do? again not questioning what you're saying, you're correct) Brown would have been an ideal prime minister to steer us through 2010-2015.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,255
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
Spark said:
I wasn't disagreeing with you btw. More that "Austerity" is a slogan that was promoted specifically by David Cameron and the conservatives to instigate an ideologically motivated transfer of wealth from the poorest to the richest. It's hinted at in that article linked with Cameron and Osborne calling Brown and Darling's 50p tax rate "distraction burglary".

Had Brown been PM there would have been cuts, but I strongly believe (as you do? again not questioning what you're saying, you're correct) Brown would have been an ideal prime minister to steer us through 2010-2015.
Click to expand...
Nice one, quite agree. Economic policy has certainly benefited those with assets over those without, like you I can't believe Brown would have kept that up for too long.
 

FireballXL5

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2015
Messages
10,090
Why should the taxpayer have to fund the benefits for lazy disabled people who just need to get up off their snivelling arses and find work? Bloody scroungers.

Esther McVey claims expenses to rent flat while husband lets out nearby home

‘Minister for common sense’ who has criticised Whitehall waste is said to have received £39,000 in two years

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/21/esther-mcvey-expenses-flat-philip-davies
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,840
Meet the Unelected Lord Shutting Down Peace Protests to ‘Save Democracy’
This arms-trade lobbyist is targeting Palestine campaigners.

Woodcock grew up on protest marches. He told GB News: “People that come from our political tradition – we come from the left, we come from the Labour party – we’re all brought up in the tradition of protest … I was taken by my mum on CND marches in the 1980s.”

He has been on a journey since then, however, and is the author of a soon to be published, government-commissioned review of political violence and disruption. He has criticised the political left and centre for “viewing the idea of disruptive, angry protest as sacrosanct to democracy”. Protest actually “threatens the liberal democratic process” when taken too far, he told Channel 4 News. “There are so many channels that are open” for people to register their views, he said. “Being in one place shouting is only one of those ways.”
Click to expand...
Woodcock fronts the Purpose Defence Coalition, a lobbying company which he says is “working to evaluate the positive impact UK defence companies are making in their communities and beyond.”

The group is sponsored by Italian arms giant Leonardo, which has been repeatedly targeted by protesters over its links to Israel. According to Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT), the UK granted 26 export licences to Leonardo for military goods to Israel between 2008 and 2021.

Woodcock’s experience as an arms lobbyist may have coloured his attitude towards protesters. Speaking to GB News, he recalled attending a recent defence industry event where “everyone who ran the gauntlet was being shouted at, screamed at, horrific things said to them, megaphone in their face.”
Click to expand...
Meet the Unelected Lord Shutting Down Peace Protests to ‘Save Democracy’ | Novara Media
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
50,384
Location
Birmingham
Reform polling at 15%. What the feck is this country turning into?
The gripe for the right was Brexit, what is the issue now?
 
Last edited:

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,789
Location
Ginseng Strip
Adisa said:
Reform polling at 15%. What the feck is this country turning into?
The gripe for the right was Brexit, what is the issue now?
Click to expand...
Migrants crossing the channel in dinghies to be put up in 5 star hotels, overloading the NHS, being the cause of all the country's problems, etc.

I'd also imagine they feel the Tory party has abit too much melanin within it's senior ranks.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,427
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
Paul the Wolf said:
Reform UK drops second parliamentary candidate in two days over extremist views

We're not really far-right - honest

At the rate of expelling one extremist candidate per day, they won't have any candidates by the time the election comes around. When will their far-right honorary president be expelled?
Click to expand...
For a country obsessed with how it helped defeat Nazism, a good chunk of the population shares plenty of their views.
 

Cloud7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,833
Kaos said:
Migrants crossing the channel in dinghies to be put up in 5 star hotels, overloading the NHS, being the cause of all the country's problems, etc.

I'd also imagine they feel the Tory party has abit too much melanin within it's senior ranks.
Click to expand...
It honestly amazes me that people really think that this is the major problem facing this country right now
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,402
Labour cannot win in my constituency so I won’t be voting for them, but today is probably the closest I’ve come to voting green again. I spent all day seeing racists on my Twitter feed kicking off about this, definitely wasn’t expecting Starmer to join them. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68632034
 

groovyalbert

it's a mute point
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
9,688
Location
London
Dan_F said:
Labour cannot win in my constituency so I won’t be voting for them, but today is probably the closest I’ve come to voting green again. I spent all day seeing racists on my Twitter feed kicking off about this, definitely wasn’t expecting Starmer to join them. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68632034
Click to expand...
Clever though from Nike to create a totally unnecessary culture war rattling point to distract from the genuinely shocking price.
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,402
Jippy said:
Yep £125 is the real outrage here- it's about double what I thought it'd cost.
Click to expand...
That’s for the real version of the kit that the players wear. They’ve always been stupidly priced and you’re either an idiot or have too much money if you buy that. I think the replica is £85, which is obviously stupid money as well, but it’s the same price as our home kit when it launches. Thats just the cost of football shirts in 2024.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,427
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
Dan_F said:
That’s for the real version of the kit that the players wear. They’ve always been stupidly priced and you’re either an idiot or have too much money if you buy that. I think the replica is £85, which is obviously stupid money as well, but it’s the same price as our home kit when it launches. Thats just the cost of football shirts in 2024.
Click to expand...
Ah, ok, I'm well out of the loop on these things- not had a shirt since 2008 and that was bought for me.
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,402
Jippy said:
Ah, ok, I'm well out of the loop on these things- not had a shirt since 2008 and that was bought for me.
Click to expand...
I think the last one I bought was around 2011 and I remember it being around £40/50. Had a look and the first article was from 2010 moaning about the cost of shirts :lol: https://amp.theguardian.com/money/blog/2010/sep/21/football-kits-premier-league-cash-cow

Slightly off topic anyway, as it was more about Starmer bothering to get involved with that shite. Maybe he was asked a question by a reporter, but I don’t understand the need to pander to that crowd at all.
 

Abizzz

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
7,637
Dan_F said:
That’s for the real version of the kit that the players wear. They’ve always been stupidly priced and you’re either an idiot or have too much money if you buy that. I think the replica is £85, which is obviously stupid money as well, but it’s the same price as our home kit when it launches. Thats just the cost of football shirts in 2024.
Click to expand...
To me 120 for the real deal makes more sense than 85 for the most expensive fake. If you're going to buy a fake at least buy a legit fake for real savings :)
 

Dan_F

Full Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2012
Messages
10,402
Abizzz said:
To me 120 for the real deal makes more sense than 85 for the most expensive fake. If you're going to buy a fake at least buy a legit fake for real savings :)
Click to expand...
Unless you’re a top level athlete, I’m not sure you’ll need the moisture wicking technology. Everything else is identical. I’ll take the £40. Might just about be able to buy the shorts for that.
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
57,427
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
Dan_F said:
I think the last one I bought was around 2011 and I remember it being around £40/50. Had a look and the first article was from 2010 moaning about the cost of shirts :lol: https://amp.theguardian.com/money/blog/2010/sep/21/football-kits-premier-league-cash-cow

Slightly off topic anyway, as it was more about Starmer bothering to get involved with that shite. Maybe he was asked a question by a reporter, but I don’t understand the need to pander to that crowd at all.
Click to expand...
Jeez, interesting inflation gauge though.

I suppose it's of those stupid questions journos ask MPs, but yep, anything that deflects from NHS funding or what next with the Rwanda debacle.
 

Bert_

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Messages
1,550
Location
Manchester
Changing the colour of the flag of that guy from Turkey. How disrespectful.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.