I haven't the time to challenge all of it, but if it was on the fall and looking good in the period 1991-1997, it's looking similarly rosy now as the chart shows a near-identical downward trend.This mess cannot be solely attributed to the last 14 years, the rot began in 1997 ......
View attachment 165188
The budget deficit with Ken Clarke as chancellor was heading towards balance, Gordon Brown made an election pledge in 1997 to stick to Clarke's spending plans for the first two years if elected. As we know he was elected and duly stuck to Clarke's spending plans for two years , that and the legacy of the growing economy he inherited enabled him to deliver a balanced budget in 2001. You can read a graph and you can therefore see what happened next once Brown started to behave like a Labour chancellor / PM . As can clearly be seen on the graph, by the time he left office he was able to hand over a sack of shit to the incoming Cameron government, the moment encapsulated for ever by Liam Byrne's note to his successor in the treasury " I am sorry, there is no money left" - He wasn't wrong.
The austerity you blame for everything was a consequence of what went before -Brown was a disaster.
It's also a constant puzzle to me how the rich and wealthy individuals and companies either avoid tax or just go to illegal means not to pay what they owe.Must admit election night was somewhat bitter sweet for me, the Tories got a much deserved kicking, Reform got a foothold in Parliament, but the British people in their infinite wisdom elected a lefty government at a time when our debt to gdp ratio is 100%.
So now we get to watch them govern the country with no money to spend and a bunch of people with political training but no apparent expertise or experience in charge. If you can remove yourself from the tragedy of it, it's strangely humorous in a dark kind of way.
Summed up quite nicely by the sight of the Chancellor blubbing away in the commons, regardless of whether you believe the story of the personal issues being the main cause, it's hard not to assume that the fact she's making a total pigs ear of the country's finances isn't giving her sleepless nights.
It's a constant puzzle to me that the progressive type can't get their heads round the fact that raising taxes reduces the tax take, due to the second order effects of higher taxes, but here we go again as a Labour chancellor responds to a growing deficit (est £51 billion shortfall) caused by a flagging economy, out of control government spending and inefficient public services, with drumroll, wait for it, higher taxes. Wonder how that will play out? Spoiler alert, badly.
How did we get here? Politicians refusing to address the underlying problems in the economy, because that's quite difficult and unpopular, and instead continuing to increase public spending beyond the levels that can be sustained and sticking the excess on the country's credit card.
Oh but the government can't go bankrupt said the experts, we can just print the money. Well yes, kind of, but what happens when that debt accumulates to the point when servicing the debt becomes an additional drag on government finances and the debt is the same size as your national income? Good question that eh? I'm no expert, but I reckon the answer is that we're screwed.
So sit back, watch our useless politicians attempt to keep the ponzi scheme going for as long as possible, and argue with strangers on the internet to pass the time, you never know Starmer, Reeves and Raynor might just prove me wrong. Lol
A bespoke thread was started earlierHomelessness minister Rushanara Ali faces calls to resign over rent hike 'hypocrisy' - BBC News https://share.google/6IUgq5dA9EDSUGJkr
Have a look at what I wrote.And there’s a reason for every rise and every fall, and it’s often due to external factors, although the 1989 to 1992 rise was largely self inflicted and was only resolved when the government was forced to leave the ERM. It’s a pointless exercise trying to make out it’s only Labour that fucks things up. Each party has had its moments but it’s mostly down to world affairs.
That is the opposite of what I wrote.It’s a pointless exercise trying to make out it’s only Labour that fucks things up.
Doesn't matter if you have the time or not, the point being that your narrative of all our financial woes being due to the " last 14 years" is demonstrably nonsense , a case of Labour part collective amnesia it seems.I haven't the time to challenge all of it, but if it was on the fall and looking good in the period 1991-1997, it's looking similalry rosy now as the chart shows a near-identical downward trend.
Then you made out it all started going wrong in 1997 which is manifestly wrong. It’s obvious what point you were trying to make and it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.Have a look at what I wrote.
That is the opposite of what I wrote.
I replied to a post that contained , yet again, the narrative that everything that is wrong is due to ' the last 14 years"
My reply was to point out that no it demonstrably is not. The graph clearly shows that the public finances were shot to pieces in 2010 when the Cameron government took over, hence austerity. I accept that there are plenty of arguments about whether that was the right direction to take for so long etc but that wasn't the point.
The point is that this narrative that all ills are due to the last 14 years is nonsense.
DeletedA bespoke thread was started earlier
OK point taken-not all. Lets go back to 1900 and Labour have had overall control for 35 years in 125. So let's agree that non-labour governments have caused the vast majority of our present woes.Doesn't matter if you have the time or not, the point being that your narrative of all our financial woes being due to the " last 14 years" is demonstrably nonsense , a case of Labour part collective amnesia it seems.
As for the current OBR forecast, if that is right it will be the first time ever. Reeves has no chance of hitting that forecast save for mammoth politically impossible tax rises or mammoth politically impossible spending cuts.
Watch out for some creative accounting - what we used to call day to day spending may well be now called investment come the autumn as she cheats her way out of her own fiscal rules.
Yes you are right.... just look at what they've done in Wales.Lol, I think we should agree thank goodness it has only been 35 years or are woes would be multiplied.
I think we can agree we have been very badly served by our politicians for the best part of 30 years.
It only doesn't stand up to scrutiny if you have no context of the information you are looking at .Then you made out it all started going wrong in 1997 which is manifestly wrong. It’s obvious what point you were trying to make and it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Thatcher left office in 1990 ffsThatcher sold everything off. What do you suggest to do when there is nothing more to sell?
As usual you are totally missing my point whilst completely ignoring the context around Tory governments supposedly doing well and brushing over the run up to black Wednesday like it never happened.It only doesn't stand up to scrutiny if you have no context of the information you are looking at .
Like claiming that Callaghan's government had the public finances going in the right direction without understanding that was entirely due to the intervention of the IMF , which that Labour government had to beg a loan from to stop the economy imploding and a run on the Pound.
I think that is even more embarrassing than your claim a couple of weeks ago that the country wasn't going to go bankrupt as there FTSE was doing well.
Manifestly wrong on both points.
I have told you why 1997 is the starting point in my original post.
The public finances weren’t under control ahead of the GFC.As usual you are totally missing my point whilst completely ignoring the context around Tory governments supposedly doing well and brushing over the run up to black Wednesday like it never happened.
You did indeed tell me why 1997 was your starting point, and between then and 2007 public finances were under control including a period of heavy investment in public services from 1999 onwards. In spite of this heavy investment the deficit to GDP ratio was coming down from 2005 only to be undone by the GFC a couple of years later which you appear to think was avoidable. It was the recovery from this, managed by the Tories, that saw public services decimated.
As for me supposedly saying that the country wasn’t going bankrupt because the markets were doing well, that’s another distortion of reality. My point was simply that the markets did not appear to be concerned by your doomsday scenario which suggests you might have been over egging it somewhat. The markets are simply one indicator amongst many of how the economy is performing.
The fact that you have aligned yourself with the thickos that intend to vote for a party that doesn’t have any policies and just uses soundbites and scaremongering suggests that your opinion is worth fuck all anyway.
Interest rates have been lowered, despite inflation being above target and headed higher, because the boe is worried that the economy is screwed, so not sure that's the flex that you think it is.Interest rates cut to lowest levels since 2023 and State Pension to rise 5%
still, it’s all awful and only Farage can sort this country out.
And her social revolution of the self over the collective is still apparent.Thatcher left office in 1990 ffs
Why did you post a graph from 1970 ffsThatcher left office in 1990 ffs
Agreed, sadly. I don't see how we can manage £40bn of services cuts, and if Reeves fiddles the books (again) by tweaking her golden rule (again) to allow more borrowing, then (a) our debt interest spirals even higher, (b) her remaining shred of credibility - such as it is - is lost, and (c) the markets would be spooked and push up bond yields even higher.It’s one example of raising taxes that I feel lies fair on everyone.
I’ve stated before that income tax simply has to rise and the sooner we all gave up to that fact the better.
Another poster has already debunked your claim that the public finances were under control up to 1997, so I won't repeat.As usual you are totally missing my point whilst completely ignoring the context around Tory governments supposedly doing well and brushing over the run up to black Wednesday like it never happened.
You did indeed tell me why 1997 was your starting point, and between then and 2007 public finances were under control including a period of heavy investment in public services from 1999 onwards. In spite of this heavy investment the deficit to GDP ratio was coming down from 2005 only to be undone by the GFC a couple of years later which you appear to think was avoidable. It was the recovery from this, managed by the Tories, that saw public services decimated.
As for me supposedly saying that the country wasn’t going bankrupt because the markets were doing well, that’s another distortion of reality. My point was simply that the markets did not appear to be concerned by your doomsday scenario which suggests you might have been over egging it somewhat. The markets are simply one indicator amongst many of how the economy is performing.
The fact that you have aligned yourself with the thickos that intend to vote for a party that doesn’t have any policies and just uses soundbites and scaremongering suggests that your opinion is worth fuck all anyway.
I have said I voted Reform at the local elections ( for a specific purpose) that does not mean I " intend" to vote for them or anyone else when I am next given the opportunity, I will make that decision at the time. So there is no " fact "The fact that you have aligned yourself with the thickos that intend to vote for a party that doesn’t have any policies and just uses soundbites and scaremongering suggests that your opinion is worth fuck all anyway.