A Question for Tory Supporters

Sailtheworld

westernpromise wrote: »

Perhaps there are some areas of public spending you think should have been cut more, so we could get there faster? Or perhaps some of the 41% who pay no income tax at all should put their hands in their pockets and maybe contribute a bit?

Yes both of those but it wasn't me making the promise to eliminate the deficit by 2015.

westernpromise wrote: »

Of course, it would have helped if Labour hadn't doubled the national debt and left an economy in which the state spent £4 for every £3 it received in tax.

The Tories election campaign platform was based on the premise that Labour were doing a rubbish job on the economy. i.e. they made the promise to eliminate the deficit knowing full well what state the economy was in.

Government net borrowing has been 1.1% of GDP in only 5 of the last 25 years - under labour governments - not that too much should be read into that......

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicspending/bulletins/ukgovernmentdebtanddeficitforeurostatmaast/march2019

If you look at the last graph you'd be hard-pressed to make a party political point. Borrowing goes up as a % of GDP during a recession and down after whoever is in government before, during or after the recession.

Silvertabby

With apologies to Churchill, the Tories are currently the worst political party - except for all the rest.

LHW99

(i.e revoking article 50 or having a second referendum are both easily implementable)

Unless there is a majority in the HoP for at least one of those options neither will happen. The idea of a second referendum was rejected by the current MP's and I suspect there will not be enough of a LibDem majority after another GE to ensure either.

swindiff

They could all take a dump on the commons benches and I would still vote for them ahead of Corbyn. That is not to say I am a fan of the Tories but I would never in a million years vote current Labour.

Thrugelmir

Sailtheworld wrote: »

Government net borrowing has been 1.1% of GDP in only 5 of the last 25 years - under labour governments - not that too much should be read into that......

What's the relevance between GDP and Government borrowing? Pump more money into the system then GDP will naturally inflate .

Sailtheworld

Thrugelmir wrote: »

What's the relevance between GDP and Government borrowing? Pump more money into the system then GDP will naturally inflate .

Other measures are available. Why not pick the years when debt actually fell over the last quarter decade and see who was in power

Unless there's another recession we're on track to see net government borrowing at 0% in the next few years. It won't make much odds who's in power no matter how much you lot try to scare yourselves about the reds under the bed.

The reason I mentioned the promise to cut the deficit to zero isn't to highlight it didn't happen but, rather, to highlight the lack of economical understanding of the Tories - it was never going to happen.

It was willy waving - Labour were making similar claims and there was a competition to see who could cut hardest and fastest. The plan didn't last long once it hit reality.

Thrugelmir

Sailtheworld wrote: »

Other measures are available.

Perhaps post war economic theory has run it's course. New kids on the block are changing the rules. The old empires are in terminal decline. At least Germany runs a balanced budget. Something our own politicians might be wise to take on board.

phillw

Thrugelmir wrote: »

New kids on the block are changing the rules.

Right, like Nick Leeson did in investment banking. Wonder what happened to him

westernpromise wrote: »

Labour is motivated by envy and hate, which make it institutionally psychotic and wholly unfit to run a whelk stall.

The whole leave campaign was motivated by envy and hate. That is why people are so angry we haven't left yet. Unfortunately the government is running the country as if it was a whelk stall.

Arklight

westernpromise wrote: »

I work in the relevant industry. It's not even a matter of debate that Labour's incompetent tripartite structure caused the GFC any more than it's a matter of debate that the earth is round. The debate ended 10 years ago.

Labour is motivated by envy and hate, which make it institutionally psychotic and wholly unfit to run a whelk stall.

I dont think Jeremy Corbyn is interested in taking over your whelk stall.

It's nice youve found a job, though.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

Right, like Nick Leeson did in investment banking. Wonder what happened to him

Nah. New kids are the up and coming economies. The ones that once provided the Western World with the wealth it enjoys today.