Labour seen as more competent

N1AK

CLAPTON wrote: »

the government interest payments are about 2% of GDP

2012 Budget is £47.2 billion in interest out of £694 billion total government spending. We spend more on interest than we do on defence. Just because it's comparitively small next to GDP doesn't make it small.

Factor in that the debt is still planned to grow even with all the 'austerity' which has barely even started and it looks even more crazy to think we should be spending more: Unless we are spending it on things that are focused purely on increasing growth and ideally funding it by cutting things that don't.

N1AK

grizzly1911 wrote: »

People keep on criticizing labour for all the woes of this country. I happen to disagree, all parties of all persuasions, are equally flawed and have all let this country go to the dogs.

We get, and have, the government that we deserve. Stop expecting democratically elected governments to completely ignore people's wishes because the people are too ignorant to know what is best.

The public has shown again and again that they want a government that can manage our debt, keep providing all the services and not increase taxes regardless of the complete nonsense of that position.

If people wanted representatives who were more individual we'd have voted to get rid of first past the post in the referendum (because it fosters a system of 2-3 strong voting blocks with little room for independents) but we didn't.

coastline

N1AK wrote: »

2012 Budget is £47.2 billion in interest out of £694 billion total government spending. We spend more on interest than we do on defence. Just because it's comparitively small next to GDP doesn't make it small.

Factor in that the debt is still planned to grow even with all the 'austerity' which has barely even started and it looks even more crazy to think we should be spending more: Unless we are spending it on things that are focused purely on increasing growth and ideally funding it by cutting things that don't.

It was booming away under the Tories the last time around 1995...ecomonic growth brought it on track I suppose..

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1980_2012UKb_11c1li011mcn_90t

A._Badger

StevieJ wrote: »

Here we go again

You're a bit behind the thread, old chap - do try to keep up.

I think we'd reached the point where PFI was being hailed as a Good Thing when being used by Labour like a drunken sailor's pay advance, and a Bad Thing when used by the Tories.

It is, of course, bad whoever uses it.

CLAPTON

N1AK wrote: »

2012 Budget is £47.2 billion in interest out of £694 billion total government spending. We spend more on interest than we do on defence. Just because it's comparitively small next to GDP doesn't make it small.

Factor in that the debt is still planned to grow even with all the 'austerity' which has barely even started and it looks even more crazy to think we should be spending more: Unless we are spending it on things that are focused purely on increasing growth and ideally funding it by cutting things that don't.

my figure of 2% of gdp was posted in the context of some-one claiming that interest absorbed 60% of gdp and should be capped at 20%.

whilst the figure is around 3% rather than 2% of gdp is was appropriate in the context of 60%.

and for the record I do think that quoting the figures as a percentage makes more sense than simply as a number without the context of the whole; there are doubtless situations where the absolute numbers are more relevant.

coastline

coastline wrote: »

It was booming away under the Tories the last time around 1995...ecomonic growth brought it on track I suppose..

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1980_2012UKb_11c1li011mcn_90t

interest costs around this time were in the region of 10% of spending...with spending about £300bn per year.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1990_1998UKb_12c1li011mcn_F0t

coastline

coastline wrote: »

interest costs around this time were in the region of 10% of spending...with spending about £300bn per year.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1990_1998UKb_12c1li011mcn_F0t

If £47bn is the interest costs today then it wasn't much different to the 1995 period..

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_2010_2015UKb_12c1li011mcn_F0t

GeorgeHowell

N1AK wrote: »

We get, and have, the government that we deserve. Stop expecting democratically elected governments to completely ignore people's wishes because the people are too ignorant to know what is best.

The public has shown again and again that they want a government that can manage our debt, keep providing all the services and not increase taxes regardless of the complete nonsense of that position.

If people wanted representatives who were more individual we'd have voted to get rid of first past the post in the referendum (because it fosters a system of 2-3 strong voting blocks with little room for independents) but we didn't.

That's probably largely true. Large swathes of the British electorate comprises individuals who are shallow, irrational/emotive, short-termist, fairly ignorant, not too diligent (euphemism for lazy), and in denial about many of life's harsh realities. This is the British character. So they want to have their cake and eat it. They expect government to provide :- high growth, jobs for all, superlative public services, low prices and inflation, high wages which go up every year, good pensions, high savings rates and low mortgage rates, ever increasing FTSE and house prices, peace and security, tough policies on crime, immigration, and welfare but not so as to appear illiberal or harsh, no disagreements in the House of Commons, and good weather ..... and for it all to be done with low taxes.

Because no party can deliver such a programme they are disillusioned with all politics and politicians.

Clegg's sudden and massive surge of popularity after the first TV debate, which melted away by the time of the election, showed how volatile and shallow are the views of many of our dear electors, and how useless polls are.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

another Brownesk announcement


nice quote from Stephanie Flanders

No different to any Government guaranteed scheme from the historic SFLG onwards. We will only be a lender of last resort but only if it is a cast iron cert.

Thrugelmir

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

That's probably largely true. Large swathes of the British electorate comprises individuals who are shallow, irrational/emotive, short-termist, fairly ignorant, not too diligent (euphemism for lazy), and in denial about many of life's harsh realities. This is the British character. So they want to have their cake and eat it. They expect government to provide :- high growth, jobs for all, superlative public services, low prices and inflation, high wages which go up every year, good pensions, high savings rates and low mortgage rates, ever increasing FTSE and house prices, peace and security, tough policies on crime, immigration, and welfare but not so as to appear illiberal or harsh, no disagreements in the House of Commons, and good weather ..... and for it all to be done with low taxes.

Because no party can deliver such a programme they are disillusioned with all politics and politicians.

Clegg's sudden and massive surge of popularity after the first TV debate, which melted away by the time of the election, showed how volatile and shallow are the views of many of our dear electors, and how useless polls are.

Valid post. The only thing thing you've missed is the train that's heading the tracks towards this cosy existance. Called the Far East express. Being complacent is certainly a word I would use.