UK 2Q GDP surpasses all expectations - Fastest Pace In 4 Years

Really2

Well after years of being shafted as a SME I must admit I am happier with the change.

But on the above points if you hold the opposition as agreeing with all policy that would make labour complicit with the 80's

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

Well after years of being shafted as a SME I must admit I am happier with the change.

But on the above points if you hold the opposition as agreeing with all policy that would make labour complicit with the 80's

Now you know how Dev feels

Really2

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Still, if the economy tanks over the next year, we will have no doubt what caused it.

See this is the part I don't get what people argue? It was labours overspending in the good times otherwise we would be cutting a hell of a lot less.

Labour were planing 20% cuts over 4 years in force by april 2011.

If 25% is away with the fairys why would 20% not be?

tomterm8

I don't think it would make labour complicit with the 80's... after all, they were not exactly in favour of private industry, and kind of wanted to turn the state into a pinko communist state at the time.

It would make them complicit with the ERM fiasco, where they actually not only agreed with going into the ERM, but wanted us to do it at a higher level.

Really2

StevieJ wrote: »

It is just some Tory reporter making things up I mean a link to a quote from Darling.

I believe he canceled that until after the election.

Graham_Devon

Peoples. Theres not a single argument on here from the more pessimistic.

Don't start on yourselves...and if you must, leave me out of it!

Really2

tomterm8 wrote: »

I don't think it would make labour complicit with the 80's... after all, they were not exactly in favour of private industry, and kind of wanted to turn the state into a pinko communist state at the time.

But like wise how can you make the conservatives complicit with labours spending and nanny state?

If you have a majority, laws go though and spending is passed.That does not mean the other party agrees, or that it would have gone through or been put forward if they were in power IMHO.

tomterm8

Well, I normally assume that if someone says they would do something, they would actually do it. Before the SHTF, they said that in the next parliament they would match labours spending plans. Of course, they would probably have spent the money better, but we would have been in exactly the same fiscal position when the SHTF.

So, are you ready to conceed that the tory budget, quite explicitly, increased the burden of taxation yet? I mean, I've only quoted the financial analysis of one of the most reputable banks in the world to show what I said was the case.

Or maybe you are going to deny that Mr Alexander wrote to departments asking them to produce plans for a 25% cut and a 40% cut?

Or, is it the case you are going to deny that the budget was for a £40 billion a year additional consolidation by the end of the parliament?

And explain how Mr Brown was responsible for the massive increases in deficit of, say, America, Spain, France, or the fact the world experienced negative growth for the first time since world war 2?

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Peoples. Theres not a single argument on here from the more pessimistic.

Don't start on yourselves...and if you must, leave me out of it!

You have become famous something like Marxism, Thatcherism, Devonianism

marklv

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

09:31 23Jul10 - STERLING RALLIES AFTER UK 2Q GDP SURPASSES ALL EXPECTATIONS

09:30 23Jul10 IGM - UK Q2 Prelim GDP Q/Q 1.1% vs consensus 0.6%

Indicator For Actual Consensus Previous
UK Prelim GDP Q/Q Q2-10 1.1% 0.6% 0.3%
UK Prelim GDP Y/Y Q2-10 1.6% 1.1% -0.2%



(more to follow.....)

Totally meaningless. The Tory cuts have not been fully implemented yet and there is still a huge risk of a double-dipper. People are having orgasms already but one quarterly growth is nothing to get excited about.