We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Yet more Evidence that the Coalition is incompetent
Comments
-
angrypirate wrote: »Well thats ok then. Im sure Mr Bank Manager would be happy with that as an excuse.....
SERIOUSLY?
THIS MAKES IT WORSE AS ITS A COST THAT COULD HAVE BEEN FACTORED IN PRIOR TO THE FINANCIAL YEAR AND JUST SHOWS EVEN MORE HOW INCOMPETENT BROWN WAS AT RUNNING WITHIN BUDGET
We've had continued periods of growth under both Tory and Labour...and still ran a budget deficit....
0 -
I think these posts show that recent governments of any colour have had a tendency to spend more than they can bring in.
The question is, why would they do this? Clearly you can please a large part of the electorate if you enhance their pensions and offer relatively safe well rewarded state jobs, and spend on infrastructure. This increases your reelection chances, but does it prove sustainable long term? I'm not sure it does in a post GFC world of reduced growth.
For Labour to get back in, what evidence do we have that they no longer need or desire the positive public sentiment that comes from spending big on the state. All I can see is the unions giving them a grace period before expecting some level of reward and protection.
Any future government is going to have reduced options, so isn't being seen as "competent" about managing public expectations in the face of a long period of cuts ? As soon as Labour got back into power the public expectation of better things would automatically rise.
...Perhaps they believe they can keep the bulk of the electorate in the dark.0 -
We've had continued periods of growth under both Tory and Labour...and still ran a budget deficit....
Budget deficits are not, in themselves, bad things. Borrowing a pound is not in itself a problem, particularly if a growing economy means your future revenues will rise to meet repayments.
Borrowing a pound when you've already borrowed a thousand pounds, then deciding to borrow even more pounds when your income is clearly about to drop, just to 'tide you over until growth resumes' is a very different thing.0 -
princeofpounds wrote: »The dip in debt burden after the 97 election of labour is due to their promise to follow tory spending plans (in a similar fashion to the tories not doing much different to what labout would have done after the recent election).
Tory budgets would have impacted for several years after the election.
The increase in debt came under Labours watch.0 -
angrypirate wrote: »Dont try and use reason and common sense with Laura. Shes a die hard red and has none. The Tories are 100% to blame regardless of the fact the people who made the mistakes are civil servants and would have made them regardless of who was in power. In fact, id put a small bet on the people who have been suspended were probably hired under Labours watch.
HA HA HA changes introduced under the Tories :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
New computer models introduced by the Tories
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:This was the first big test.
We also now know that the fatal flaw wasn't discovered until last week - it then took until Tuesday of this week to unearth its true horror.
and :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
to the 17 posters that thanked your brilliant post
:rotfl:
Soooooooooo uselesssssssss................If you keep doing what you've always done - you will keep getting what you've always got.0 -
HA HA HA changes introduced under the Tories :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
New computer models introduced by the Tories
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
and :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
to the 17 posters that thanked your brilliant post
:rotfl:
Quite afternoon in the conference PR office, Laura?
Soooooooooo uselesssssssss................
Quiet afternoon in the conference PR office, Laura?0 -
The decision to cancel the bidding process would cost £40million, but most observers expect the final bill to rise to well over £100million because of potential compensation claims from FirstGroup and the costs associated with a complete overhaul of the franchise system.
Downing Street is firmly pinning the blame on civil servants......If you keep doing what you've always done - you will keep getting what you've always got.0 -
-
Tory budgets would have impacted for several years after the election.
The increase in debt came under Labours watch.
Eh? That's exactly what I was saying.0 -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19809717
Can't wait 'til they are gone. Couldn't organise the proverbial
Laura, I could give you several labour blunders and u-turns which cost more than this. I mean PROPER labour blunders, not some civil service errors.
Instead, I'll just post a picture.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards