So the Tories didn't "snuff out" the recovery in 2010

[Deleted User]

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Which jobs would you invest in?

High quality well paid jobs would be a start,lets say the 2000 steel jobs lost this week,the 200 print jobs in york lost today,the list is long and varied,we need state intervention to save and create these jobs,some will tell you as EU members we can't do that,tell that to the Italians and the French and Germans
Manufacturing now accounts for only 11% of GDP,its a disgrace

CLAPTON

woodbine wrote: »

High quality well paid jobs would be a start,lets say the 2000 steel jobs lost this week,the 200 print jobs in york lost today,the list is long and varied,we need state intervention to save and create these jobs,some will tell you as EU members we can't do that,tell that to the Italians and the French and Germans
Manufacturing now accounts for only 11% of GDP,its a disgrace

you really think there is a shortage of steel in the world and want to pay more tax to produce more that no-one will buy?

you must long for a nationalised British Leyland (did you ever drive their cars?)

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

I find it incredible that in latter end of 2015 we start revising our interpretation of growth in 2010. How long does it take to do the calculations. On that basis we should be sceptical about the data in the last two years as well. In fact is any growth calculation accurate?

In a previous life I used to complete ONS returns. The Company was at the time the second largest in the sector in the UK. So we had to complete every form conceivable. Due to the nature of the trading we were allowed to submit guess estimates on a quarterly basis. That we subsequently revised as we finalised the accounting in the months after. The annual form detailing the expenditure relating to Repairs and Renewals ran to 50 pages. Required us to do far more work than was even needed by the HMRC. Due to the complexity involved we applied for and were given extensions to file the data. On one occasion this was 10 months after the year end.

Mistermeaner

woodbine wrote: »

High quality well paid jobs would be a start,lets say the 2000 steel jobs lost this week,the 200 print jobs in york lost today,the list is long and varied,we need state intervention to save and create these jobs,some will tell you as EU members we can't do that,tell that to the Italians and the French and Germans
Manufacturing now accounts for only 11% of GDP,its a disgrace

That's not investing in jobs that's subsidising loss making businesses which is a sure fire way to bankruptcy.

The way to invest in jobs is to make cheap finance available to businesses to allow them to invest and grow, and to take the shaclkes of taxation off to allow them to compete globally - forcing high wages, legislation, green taxes etc on industry as well as having expensive energy doesn't do business therefore jobs any good.

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

you really think there is a shortage of steel in the world and want to pay more tax to produce more that no-one will buy?

you must long for a nationalised British Leyland (did you ever drive their cars?)

Not as simple as that is it, the subsidy would reduce the price and the steel could sell and the cost of subsidy could be less than the loss in Tax + cost of benefits.

Mistermeaner

ukcarper wrote: »

Not as simple as that is it, the subsidy would reduce the price and the steel could sell and the cost of subsidy could be less than the loss in Tax + cost of benefits.

only if your cost of benefits is too high

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

Not as simple as that is it, the subsidy would reduce the price and the steel could sell and the cost of subsidy could be less than the loss in Tax + cost of benefits.

Even if that were true, that would be very short-term economic policy that would eventually lead to economic stagnation.

Much better to redeploy those economic resources (labour and capital) away from a loss making industry into one that actually made a profit.

CLAPTON

ukcarper wrote: »

Not as simple as that is it, the subsidy would reduce the price and the steel could sell and the cost of subsidy could be less than the loss in Tax + cost of benefits.

no, it is as simple as that.
the price of steel is low already : in fact that is exactly the problem


there is no merit in wasting taxpayers money in a dead industry : if we are going to waste money better to do something with a future

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

Let's not forget on 2007 Osborne promised to match Labour spending.

Let's not forget that in 2015 McDonnell promised to match the Conservatives in deficit reduction.:)

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

no, it is as simple as that.
the price of steel is low already : in fact that is exactly the problem


there is no merit in wasting taxpayers money in a dead industry : if we are going to waste money better to do something with a future

So you think they we will stop using steel,