Do you think we could have avoided recession if the Tories were in power?

Generali

bendix wrote: »

Perhaps, in purely technical or statistical terms,yes. I agree.

But that is just looking at a recession via a graph.

In terms of human impact, it will be one of the easiest in that standards of living will decline, but from a signficantly higher starting point than in previous recessions. As we progress, we get richer as a society. As such, our regular falls are increasingly cushioned.

When I hear hyperbolic claims that this will be as bad as 1929, it makes me laugh. Maybe falls will be the same statistically, but don't tell me real human beings are going to suffer to the same extent as tens of millions of people did in the 1930s.

I agree absolutely. 25% off living standards (as the US experienced 1930-33) is utterly different when you take it from today's income compared to yesterday's.

Really2

Today MSE as mainly been poultry related.

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

Today MSE as mainly been poultry related.

My chooks really got you going eh?

Generali

Really2 wrote: »

Today MSE as mainly been poultry related.

You mean it's fowl?

Really2

It just tickled me that is when I find my problem rarther amusing.

PS My neighbours have some of those ones which look like they are wearing furry boots.

I think we should all mis-spell or use the wrong words. It much more fun.:D

lostinrates

LauraW10 wrote: »

Try this for starters

The Kondratieff Theory


http://www.kwaves.com/kond_overview.htm

Cause?:

The interaction of the participants within the economy causes wealth, as represented by savings, and the production of capital equipment to be accumulated for the future. The expansion of production and affluence causes prices to rise, and the increased volume of goods requires a higher velocity of money, thus creating a higher price structure..................

Accompanying growth is a shift in social demands. As wealth is accumulated and new innovation introduced great upheavals and displacements take place. The process of social unrest builds with growth culminating in massive shifts in the way work is defined and the role of the participants in society

The piece is mainly centred on the cycle and what accompanies it not what causes it. Hence my question mark.

Really2

Generali wrote: »

You mean it's fowl?

Just a lot of chicken and eggs, and fowl today.:D

(mainly my fault:))

bendix

Really2 wrote: »

Just a lot of chicken and eggs, and fowl today.:D

(mainly my fault:))

Chicken related as in a lot of headless chickens running around crying doom and gloom?

Or Chicken related as in the Chicken Little and his skies falling in?

Really2

Sorry now I have started something.:D

The only thing I can say today is English as far too many words with far too many meaning to be used on the Internet.

(It is a cross thread thing:))

lostinrates

bendix wrote: »

Chicken related as in a lot of headless chickens running around crying doom and gloom?

Or Chicken related as in the Chicken Little and his skies falling in?

all of the above. And fowl play.

And best laid planning permission applications