Osborne Loses It - Our Triple A Rating And Its Future

GeneHunt_2

Fella wrote: »

You appear to be angrily agreeing with me.

Yeah we agree this government is carp.

paulmapp8306

GeneHunt wrote: »

I'm sick of listening to the Tories blaming labour for where we are - they've had to 2 years to do something about the deficit and they've done sweet FA in the cutting department - in fact, things are getting worse.

GROW A SPINE AND MAKE SOME CUTS YOU BUNCH OF CLOWNS.

2 years ... 2 years .... Labour took 10 to ruin the country, and its going to take the cons 10 years to put it right.

Im fed up of Labour NOT taking responsibility for the state they left us in.

The sad fact is that the general public are fickle, and self serving. they would - in general - rather have what labor promise without realising the COST of that, than suffer cuts in spoending without seeing a result. The fact that the result is there to see if you inderstand whats happening is beside the point. Its highly likely that labour will be back in power soon. They will revert to type and in another 5-10 years were going to be in twice the state we are now.

Fella

GeneHunt wrote: »

Yeah we agree this government is carp.

Yes. I wouldn't disagree with that. They haven't made nearly enough cuts, they've done nothing to get rid of red tape, they're ultimately probably going to fudge Europe & they are far more worried about how things can be spun than anything else.

None of which stops Labour being repsonsible for the debt though, therefore I don't particularly blame them for constantly reminding people who caused it. Particularly when you have vermin like Ed Balls actually having the cheek to say anything at all on the topic....

paulmapp8306

GeneHunt wrote: »

oh please the Tories have had 2 and a half years to do something and all they are doing is piling up even more debt....they need to grow some balls or get voted out... I'm honestly not sure that the Labour party could have messed up this bad...

They are "piling" up debt a lot slower than Labour did. you cant just reverse to reducing the deficite. Just look how people are reacting to the cuts we have now - which are having an effect. If they had introduced the ammount of cuts needed, along with methods of increasing revenue - in order to reduce our actual debt then we would have anarchy.

it doesnt help that its not a Cons government but a co-alition. Any severe cuts would be vetoed anyway.

Can you imagine public outcry is all tax went up by 2-3% and the cuts made had been 2-3 times as much? that is the level needed to rectify Labours 10 years of spending. It just wasnt going to happen that quickly.

coastline

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

They are "piling" up debt a lot slower than Labour did.

Just to let posters see the debt piling up...Tories rattled up 4 times the debt..

[IMG]http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ukgs_line.php?title=Public Net Debt&year=1978_1997&sname=&units=b&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&spending0=79.18_86.88_98.20_113.80_125.20_132.50_143.80_157.20_162.70_167.80_167.40_153.90_152.20_151.30_166.10_202.60_249.80_290.00_322.10_348.00&legend=&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a[/IMG]


Labour rattled up 2 times the debt...its certainly not clear cut that one party is better than another..

[IMG]http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ukgs_line.php?title=Public Net Debt&year=1997_2010&sname=&units=b&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&spending0=348.00_352.90_351.60_345.40_312.40_315.50_347.10_382.80_424.00_463.00_500.00_525.00_616.90_759.50&legend=&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a[/IMG]

drc

So, if the UK does lose its AAA rating, what does this mean for the man on the street in terms of interest rates, cuts etc?

drc

GeneHunt wrote: »

Yeah we agree this government is carp.

All governments are carp because they are all essentially the same party - LibLabCon.

LauraW10

Who Knew????

George Osborne is a part-time Chancellor with his head in his hands. He slashed public spending and talked down the economy. What else did we expect?


Not healing but shrinking, we are on the wrong track because of failed policies

It was always going to come to this. Slashing public spending especially investment and talking the economy down when the recovery was still fragile was always going to be contractionary.

Our part-time Chancellor continues to put his head in the sand by sticking to his failed fiscal consolidation plans; in the House of Commons in his Autumn Statement he once again claimed “the economy is healing” and his economic plans are “on the right track”. What planet is he on?

LINK

Mr Blanchflower & The Labour Party consistently proven to be right by events....sadly...

Jegersmart

The situation has nothing to do with which set of politicians are or have been in power, almost every nation has had the same growth in debt over the past 20+ years.

If you have a monetary system based on debt then the growth of debt is more or less inevitable. It has become acceptable on all levels to leverage future growth or earnings to use credit to fund "projects" which increases the debt further. The UK government which has about 150% of its income as debt at the current time, is still below the level of indebtedness enjoyed by most homeowners who have 225%+ of income as debts on their property. With fairly large commitments around welfare, healthcare, defence and other major centres of cost for the government that are more or less fixed the difference that another political party can achieve is extremely limited.

imho
J

paulmapp8306

coastline wrote: »

Just to let posters see the debt piling up...Tories rattled up 4 times the debt..

[IMG]http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ukgs_line.php?title=Public Net Debt&year=1978_1997&sname=&units=b&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&spending0=79.18_86.88_98.20_113.80_125.20_132.50_143.80_157.20_162.70_167.80_167.40_153.90_152.20_151.30_166.10_202.60_249.80_290.00_322.10_348.00&legend=&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a[/IMG]


Labour rattled up 2 times the debt...its certainly not clear cut that one party is better than another..

[IMG]http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/ukgs_line.php?title=Public Net Debt&year=1997_2010&sname=&units=b&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&spending0=348.00_352.90_351.60_345.40_312.40_315.50_347.10_382.80_424.00_463.00_500.00_525.00_616.90_759.50&legend=&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a[/IMG]

Agreed, but neither of those show the last 2 years - which in essense is whats being stated here.

still, its the shape of those graphs that was worrying. At least under the cons it was rounding off - with the Labor chart god only knows where we would now be.

Also, shows WHY the cons havent managed to reduce the debt yet. Look how sharp it was going up - you have to reduce the "increase" before you can cut the total.