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!
Ed milliband smoking crack....
Comments
-
The root of the problem was nothing to do with excessive spending, it would have happened anyway given the neo-liberal consensus and reluctance to regulate the greed of the financial sector. To claim debt was out of control in 2005 is ridiculous!
Why doesn't the right wing press admit this? Simply because they can't criticise Labour for what they got badly wrong, having light regulation of the banking sector. From the same paper
and here lies the problem, there is no difference between the Blair and Cameron governments! Read thisDavid Cameron, speech entitled "The new global economy" in June 22, 2006:
The lessons from the City are clear. Low tax. Low regulation. Meritocracy. Openness. Innovation. These are the keys to success
David Cameron, speech entitled "Bringing law and order to the financial markets" , March 24, 2009:Our approach is to cut regulation where the problem is too much of it
David Cameron, in a keynote speech at a breakfast for senior city figures hosted by The City of London, March 28, 2008:We need to avoid a rush to judgement and an instant rewriting of all the regulatory rules
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9376534/Regulating-the-banks-what-politicians-used-to-say-about-the-City.htmlDavid Cameron, at the London School of Economics, September 2007: 'When I studied economics, 20 years ago, arguments raged about the most basic principles of how to run the economy [and]...there was a vast gulf between left and right as to how this could best be achieved. The left advocated more intervention and government ownership. Those on the right argued for monetary discipline and free enterprise.
'That debate is now settled. Over the past 15 years, governments across the world have put into practice the principles of monetary discipline and free enterprise. The result? A vast increase in global wealth. The world economy more stable than for a generation.
I'm proud that this is one of the few countries in the world where all serious candidates for high office support the principles of free trade and monetary discipline.
Cameron is applauding Labour for monetary discipline and (wrongly) free enterprise, soon to be the nemesis of the economy
0 -
You might want to post the total debt graph for reference...0
-
-
Why oh why do people post up graphs showing debt from World War 1 & 2 to somehow prove debt was low in the last decade?
Ridiculous argument.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Why oh why do people post up graphs showing debt from World War 1 & 2 to somehow prove debt was low in the last decade?
Ridiculous argument.
How about the last 350 years then.
The fact is that UK debt was only lower in about 3 decades out of the last 350 years than it was in 2007.
You can't blame all of that on WW1 and WW2.
That would be a ridiculous argument.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Why oh why do people post up graphs showing debt from World War 1 & 2 to somehow prove debt was low in the last decade?
Ridiculous argument.
How else should one show it, just as it became low enough to make it look high? The fact is that as a proportion of GDP, debt has been much higher for nearly all of the time we have had a national debt, including before WW1.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Why oh why do people post up graphs showing debt from World War 1 & 2 to somehow prove debt was low in the last decade?
Ridiculous argument.
Why do you want to suppress the information?
Give people the full facts and let people draw their own conclusions... what's wrong with that?0 -
How else should one show it, just as it became low enough to make it look high? The fact is that as a proportion of GDP, debt has been much higher for nearly all of the time we have had a national debt, including before WW1.
It's why we have the debt thats important.
If were wracking up debt just to keep living standards where they are, then there lies the problem.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards