Labour Ahead In Economy Poll -By 2% You Gov

coastline

We'll soon find out if the government are serious about reducing the nations debt if the sale of RBS goes ahead..
Rumours of stake selling have made the news in the last few days...and could be within 1-2 years..
So what do they do with the first stake of £5bn...reduce the debts which would hardly dent the bill....or a nice tax giveaway just in time for the election....I think the latter..;)

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/Finance/article1220203.ece

http://www.cityam.com/article/osborne-could-sell-rbs-stake-year-s-time

PaulF81

Strip growth in government lzpending and credit expansion out of the economy and labour would have had a recession from 2003 onwards.

Any idiot can borrow, borrow, borrow and keep GDP going up. It had to end some day. It did, hence the mess we are in.

coastline

PaulF81 wrote: »

Strip growth in government lzpending and credit expansion out of the economy and labour would have had a recession from 2003 onwards.

Any idiot can borrow, borrow, borrow and keep GDP going up. It had to end some day. It did, hence the mess we are in.

seems theres more than one idiot then...;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR_hfQU-4r0

Masomnia

purch wrote: »

It should be the easiest time to be in Opposition ever currently, even easier than it was in the 1970's.

That Labour aren't further ahead is strange. They need to drop Balls if they want to be credible.

This is a time of National Emergency, so a little consensus would help.

Certainly Osbourne is a lame duck Chancellor and becoming a major liability for the country on the World stage, but with Labours alternative being Ed Balls, that will not instill confidence anywhere in the World.

As a nation we deserve better than these two clowns.

Who would want the job, though? The 2015 election is another poisoned chalice. If someone like Ken Clarke or Hague put themselves forward as an alternative to Osborne then I'm sure Cameron would consider it, but they know how thankless a job it is.

Like wise in Labour; who do you pick? Chukka Umunna is biding his time, as is David Miliband. They'll jump at the chance of being Chancellor when the UK economy is back to sustained growth and the public finances are in reasonable order. Alan Johnson?!

N1AK

Labours one giant economic failure was not that the global crisis happened but that they ran the country through one of the longest periods of growth in history without giving us a saving pot for when it ended.

Between 1992 and 2008 we had consistent economic growth. UK borrowing fell every year between 1993-1997 under the conservatives. Labour followed the conservative spending plans initially and our budget peaked at a surplus in 2000. They then increased government spending massively; so massively that even though our economy was growing we needed to borrow almost £40 billion pa in the years before the crisis.

Labour's management of the economy could be compared to someone who is earning £500k a year and spending the lot. He loses his job, his rented house, his rented car etc but then claims that it wasn't his fault; how could he have predicted he would lose his job? I'd have a hard time feeling sorry for him and I certainly wouldn't invite him to manage my finances in future.

N1AK

Masomnia wrote: »

Who would want the job, though? The 2015 election is another poisoned chalice. If someone like Ken Clarke or Hague put themselves forward as an alternative to Osborne then I'm sure Cameron would consider it, but they know how thankless a job it is.

The problem for the conservatives is even more complex than that. If they actually believe that the current plan is still the best course of action then changing chancellor wouldn't stop the criticism. It would only make sense to change chancellor if they want to do a u-turn about austerity so the new guy could draw a proper line under it.

StevieJ

Roundabouts wrote: »

Wasn't it Labour who created all the debt that put us in the mess that we're in? I doubt if people's memories are so short to forget that fact.

Don't think so, I haven't got the figures to hand but it wouldn't surprise me if the current govt hadn't already added more to the debt pile than Labour did in 13 years, the worry is there is still two years to go

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

Don't think so, I haven't got the figures to hand but it wouldn't surprise me if the current govt hadn't already added more to the debt pile than Labour did in 13 years, the worry is there is still two years to go

You complain they cut too much.

You complain they add to the debt.

I mean...what you want?! Unless you believe in the magic wand what should the coalition be doing is they shouldn't be cutting and shouldn't be adding to debt?

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You complain they cut too much.

You complain they add to the debt.

I mean...what you want?! Unless you believe in the magic wand what should the coalition be doing is they shouldn't be cutting and shouldn't be adding to debt?

I don't complain about anything, I occasionally add one or two facts, like above (28) to create a little perspective

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

I don't complain about anything, I occasionally add one or two facts, like above (28) to create a little perspective

The smilies say it all though. It would be difficult after all your discussions revolving around my two examples to state you were just wobbling on the top of that fence!