Cons Increase Deficit & National Debt Targets Missed

Generali

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I for one have added certain individuals to my ignore list. As have no wish to read such mindless endless drivel.

I'll do that in a bit. Sometimes it's good to show posters up for what they are first

PaulF81

StevieJ wrote: »

I make that four under Labour and two under Tory, how ironic

After lengthy periods of Tory rule that were were required after the Labour bankrupt the country in the70s. A d went ahead and repeated again last decade.

coastline

PaulF81 wrote: »

After lengthy periods of Tory rule that were were required after the Labour bankrupt the country in the70s. A d went ahead and repeated again last decade.

Have a closer look at the 1970's....Labour came to power in 1974 and inherited a rising budget deficit from the Tories.
In 1978 its falling again when the Tories took over as budget cuts were in place and economic growth had resumed...good old Labour.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmtreasury/5260056945/

StevieJ

PaulF81 wrote: »

After lengthy periods of Tory rule that were were required after the Labour bankrupt the country in the70s. A d went ahead and repeated again last decade.

You believe some rubbish you don't you In the 70's it was The Tories that nearly bankrupted the country (under Ted Heath) and Labour who gradually got a grip towards the end of the decade only to be let down by some Unions (and joyous Tory newspaper reporting). I bet Maggie couldn't believe her luck As for the 90's and the Tory introduction of PFI and an attempt to lever GB into what was later to become the Euro (thank God they cocked that up),

StevieJ

coastline wrote: »

Have a closer look at the 1970's....Labour came to power in 1974 and inherited a rising budget deficit from the Tories.
In 1978 its falling again when the Tories took over as budget cuts were in place and economic growth had resumed...good old Labour.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hmtreasury/5260056945/

And North Sea Oil had begun to flow in meaningful quantities, and dole queues had started to form to spend that additional revenue

Generali

StevieJ wrote: »

You believe some rubbish you don't you In the 70's it was The Tories that nearly bankrupted the country (under Ted Heath) and Labour who gradually got a grip towards the end of the decade only to be let down by some Unions (and joyous Tory newspaper reporting). I bet Maggie couldn't believe her luck As for the 90's and the Tory introduction of PFI and an attempt to lever GB into what was later to become the Euro (thank God they cocked that up),

Economic history is an interesting thing.

Labour had a unpopular yet successful policy forced on it by the IMF in 1976 as a bailout condition (for those that don't know, the Labour Government had to ask the IMF for a bailout in 1976 as they couldn't raise the money they wanted to spend through taxation or borrowing) known as monetarism. Monetarism became a term of abuse for the economic policies of the Thatcher era but her Government wasn't responsible for its introduction.

The unions reacted to ruinous inflation resulting from the previous crazy Labour and Tory policies of the 1970s plus of course rising oil prices which is what led to the downfall of Callaghan's Government. The idea was that by holding public sector wages below inflation the wage-price spiral would be ended and inflation would fall. After a while the workers got fed up with this policy and had the power to oppose it quite forcefully.

It is generally assumed that an election in 1978 would have led to a Labour win and it would have been interesting to see the policies they would have pursued.

The Tories introduced PFI which isn't a bad idea in itself (the best should provide public services not the public sector) but the accounting treatment of it is ludicrous IMHO.

The Euro was never going to be introduced under Lady Thatcher or Mr Major. Major had enough difficulty getting Maastricht ratified with all the opt outs!

grizzly1911

Generali wrote: »

Major. Major

Must be all those Catch 22's;)

Is it me? I read Ghandi instead of Ghenkis Khan onm another thread....

Wookster

Generali wrote: »

I'll do that in a bit. Sometimes it's good to show posters up for what they are first

Here here. I have no patience for mindless zealots who post bile dressed up as discussion and have just added two to my ignore list.

Let's hope the quality of discourse grows here.

StevieJ

Wookster wrote: »

Here here. I have no patience for mindless zealots who post bile dressed up as discussion and have just added two to my ignore list.

Let's hope the quality of discourse grows here.

I hear what you say Wookie

After lengthy periods of Tory rule that were were required after the Labour bankrupt the country in the70s. A d went ahead and repeated again last decade.

chewmylegoff

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

I refer you here :

(as to the last quarter and what growth would have been we will never know because Osborne choked it off but in total 3.75 - 4 % would not have seemed unreasonable aggregating the exciting looking third quarter - as to whether we annualise it, well 'you pays your money and you takes your choice' Fact is we would Kill for those growth figures now! The private sector jobs never came.... neither did BSkyB... to save his bacon...)

http://hhgrahamjones.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-tories-plan-has-failed-as-borrowing.html

Even your source disagrees with you! It says that growth was 2.1% for 9 months which is 2.8% per annum. Furthermore the numbers quoted are wrong as they were revised later so growth for the period jan to sept 2010 was actually 1.9% (2.5% per annum).

Growth was not 4% when the last labour govt left office, and the eurozone debt crisis would still have happened if they had won the 2010 election; labour's policies would not have prevented a double dip recession (in the same way that labour's policies did not cause the 2008 recession).