angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 789
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 11, 2017 14:58:27 GMT
The whole brexit thing is far less worrying to me than the prospect of JC being the next prime minister. If I thought there was a a real possibility this country could elect a Marxist pm over the next 2 years I would start moving everything I own to the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Jun 11, 2017 15:49:16 GMT
The whole brexit thing is far less worrying to me than the prospect of JC being the next prime minister. If I thought there was a a real possibility this country could elect a Marxist pm over the next 2 years I would start moving everything I own to the U.S. If there’s another election this year I think Corbyn will stand a good chance of winning, unless as I said in an earlier post, the Conservatives get their fingers out smartly, when you think how far they were ahead in the local elections on May 4 and then in 5 weeks they managed to blow that lead, the sheer incompetence is unbelievable.
|
|
|
Post by brummiefred on Jun 11, 2017 16:37:13 GMT
I like to think that I'm not without some grey matter but I have to confess that I didn't appreciate the difference between the deficit and the national debt, probably because politicians don't really want us to, but then I saw a discussion between Victoria Derbyshire and Andrew Mitchell, he who believes that rules are for others, during which I was staggered to learn that George Osborne austerity package to reduce the deficit by 2015/2020/2050 or whenever has managed to double our national debt. Now we have JC, somewhat apt maybe, promising the magic money tree policies, and who wouldn't vote for free this and free that when only 5% are footing the bill, then what would our debt be then, I shudder to think.
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 789
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 11, 2017 17:50:03 GMT
The whole brexit thing is far less worrying to me than the prospect of JC being the next prime minister. If I thought there was a a real possibility this country could elect a Marxist pm over the next 2 years I would start moving everything I own to the U.S. If there’s another election this year I think Corbyn will stand a good chance of winning, unless as I said in an earlier post, the Conservatives get their fingers out smartly, when you think how far they were ahead in the local elections on May 4 and then in 5 weeks they managed to blow that lead, the sheer incompetence is unbelievable. I wouldnt be at all surprised if the TM snap election and terrible campaign was not an attempt to sabotage Brexit.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 11, 2017 18:22:52 GMT
I like to think that I'm not without some grey matter but I have to confess that I didn't appreciate the difference between the deficit and the national debt, probably because politicians don't really want us to, but then I saw a discussion between Victoria Derbyshire and Andrew Mitchell, he who believes that rules are for others, during which I was staggered to learn that George Osborne austerity package to reduce the deficit by 2015/2020/2050 or whenever has managed to double our national debt. It's very simple... Each year, money comes in, money goes out from the government. If more comes in than goes out, the budget is in surplus. If more goes out than comes in, the budget is in deficit. If the budget is in deficit, debt has to go up - because money has to be borrowed to fill that gap. If the budget is in surplus, debt can come down - because some of that borrowed money can be repaid. The budget has been in deficit since 2002, after a brief tick into surplus. The deficit rocketed in 2008. It's now back down to more historically normal levels, but hasn't made it into surplus again. Debt has, therefore, been going up rapidly. Debt is very high in £ terms, but massively lower than it has been historically - but, then, it's always been wars that have caused it to rocket before...
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,044
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 11, 2017 19:58:59 GMT
I like to think that I'm not without some grey matter but I have to confess that I didn't appreciate the difference between the deficit and the national debt, probably because politicians don't really want us to, but then I saw a discussion between Victoria Derbyshire and Andrew Mitchell, he who believes that rules are for others, during which I was staggered to learn that George Osborne austerity package to reduce the deficit by 2015/2020/2050 or whenever has managed to double our national debt. It's very simple... Each year, money comes in, money goes out from the government. If more comes in than goes out, the budget is in surplus. If more goes out than comes in, the budget is in deficit. And we all know Mr Micawber's famous, and oft-quoted, recipe for happiness
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Jun 11, 2017 21:31:04 GMT
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jun 11, 2017 22:56:24 GMT
It's relevant, but incomplete. For example it doesn't take account of inflation, growth, or perhaps most importantly productivity growth. I'm no spendthrift Corbanite but there are reasons why spending (at historically low interest rates) to invest in infrastructure (to boost productivity) might be worthwhile.
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Jun 12, 2017 9:23:11 GMT
It's relevant, but incomplete. For example it doesn't take account of inflation, growth, or perhaps most importantly productivity growth. I'm no spendthrift Corbanite but there are reasons why spending (at historically low interest rates) to invest in infrastructure (to boost productivity) might be worthwhile. Micawber's quote is and always will be relevant, inflation doesn’t come in to it. Yes some controlled borrowing can be beneficial but only the financially illiterate, be that governments or individuals, spend more than their income over a period of time be that 1 year, 5 years or 10 years and never reduce the debt. I appreciate that many people struggle with day to day living costs but debt is not the answer, don’t ask me how you solve that, I really don’t know. The bottom line is cut your coat according to your cloth which together with Micawber are basic principles of sensible financial management.
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 789
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 12, 2017 10:10:39 GMT
It's relevant, but incomplete. For example it doesn't take account of inflation, growth, or perhaps most importantly productivity growth. I'm no spendthrift Corbanite but there are reasons why spending (at historically low interest rates) to invest in infrastructure (to boost productivity) might be worthwhile. the problem I have with governments in general is they tend to be corrupt and incompetent. Therefore I take the view the less they do the better. although there are some cases where government spending is justified in the long run I take the view that all it does is misallocates resources. most of the things that are destroying this country ranging from the insane housing bubble to working families being unable to afford to start a family while those on welfare being better off with large families are due to government financial intervention.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 12, 2017 11:29:37 GMT
It's relevant, but incomplete. For example it doesn't take account of inflation, growth, or perhaps most importantly productivity growth. I'm no spendthrift Corbanite but there are reasons why spending (at historically low interest rates) to invest in infrastructure (to boost productivity) might be worthwhile. Micawber's quote is and always will be relevant, inflation doesn’t come in to it. Yes some controlled borrowing can be beneficial but only the financially illiterate, be that governments or individuals, spend more than their income over a period of time be that 1 year, 5 years or 10 years and never reduce the debt. I appreciate that many people struggle with day to day living costs but debt is not the answer, don’t ask me how you solve that, I really don’t know. The bottom line is cut your coat according to your cloth which together with Micawber are basic principles of sensible financial management. Debt is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. Many households have large debt, many multiples of their income - and are immensely glad of the opportunity to do so. It's called a "mortgage"... Short-term debt also allows people to drive new cars, or provides the opportunity to spread the cost of large purchases such as washing machines or sofas. Almost every single company of any size has substantial debt - shareholders, bonds etc. Hell, if it wasn't for debt, we wouldn't BE here, because we wouldn't be able to lend money to our "peers", right...? That's not to say that Micawber was wrong, of course. Managing debt is essential. The UK's public debt is high, sure - 92% of GDP. It's not ridiculously high - Japan tops the table, 235%. France and Canada are both above us - 96% and 98%. But it is high - the US is 74%, Germany is 69%, the world average is 64%. But if you want proof that debt is not inherently bad, and low-to-zero debt is inherently good, then look at the bottom of the table... North Korea - 0.4%. Tajikistan - 6.5%. DR Congo - 18.2%. Or even Russia, 13.7% - doesn't stop them from being hostages to changing world economic winds, because their low debt is a result of exports of a single commodity. So how do we bring it down...? We turn government expenditure from deficit to surplus. How? Spend less, more income. Tax up, increase austerity. That'll help the economy...?
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Jun 12, 2017 12:04:27 GMT
Micawber's quote is and always will be relevant, inflation doesn’t come in to it. Yes some controlled borrowing can be beneficial but only the financially illiterate, be that governments or individuals, spend more than their income over a period of time be that 1 year, 5 years or 10 years and never reduce the debt. I appreciate that many people struggle with day to day living costs but debt is not the answer, don’t ask me how you solve that, I really don’t know. The bottom line is cut your coat according to your cloth which together with Micawber are basic principles of sensible financial management. Managing debt is essential. That’s exactly what I’m saying, and I suspect that a lot of people don’t manage it.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,044
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 12, 2017 17:50:09 GMT
It's relevant, but incomplete. For example it doesn't take account of inflation, growth, or perhaps most importantly productivity growth. I'm no spendthrift Corbanite but there are reasons why spending (at historically low interest rates) to invest in infrastructure (to boost productivity) might be worthwhile. The bottom line is cut your coat according to your cloth which together with Micawber are basic principles of sensible financial management. I'm no Labour supporter, but I did feel a bit sorry for GB. He spent 10 years trying to get TB out of No 10, and when he finally goes he leaves behind an enormous mess. It always made me chuckle when GB was PM the financial problems were caused by global forces, but as soon as call me Dave took over it was a problem made in No 10. Ultimately, the problems of 2008/9 were brought about by people, business and Governments taking on debt with no realistic repayment plan. In my view the last thing we need is a load more debt.
|
|
skippyonspeed
Some people think I'm a little bit crazy, but I know my mind's not hazy
Posts: 787
Likes: 424
|
Post by skippyonspeed on Jun 12, 2017 20:06:25 GMT
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,015
Likes: 5,144
|
Post by adrianc on Jun 13, 2017 7:36:56 GMT
|
|