Bank of England.....my arse !!

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Monetry policy has got nothing to do with the current fiscal retrenchment taking place by the governemnt, this monetry activism is being utilised in order to create a stimulus to get growth moving (0.1% over 9 months) and because interest rates are at an all time low (0.5%) it couldn't be slacker. This will provide stimulus, but in my opinion the govt deficit reduction plan, with its zelous cuts are creating a weak economy, and due to its fragile nature: economic growth is slowing as a result. This flawed rhetoric of the chancedllor to impose these draconian cuts in governemnt spending and destruction of the public sector, is that if we alter our economic plan (say increase capital spending in a keynsian manner), the international markets will have our balls, which will in turn make borrowing more expenisve. This is absolute bolloks,the markets are more concerned about the sovreign debt crisis in the eurozone. This political manovering by the treasury is halting our recovery, and along with osbourne spouting bile 'that we we were like greece' is harming business and consumer confidance, we could see us slip into a double dip recession. Arsehole.

A lot of words to say "I'm against the cuts." SWP's back

I'm not against the cuts, we need to recude our budget deficit, but not at the pace that it is currently at.

Monetry policy has got nothing to do with the current fiscal retrenchment taking place by the governemnt, this monetry activism is being utilised in order to create a stimulus to get growth moving (0.1% over 9 months) and because interest rates are at an all time low (0.5%) it couldn't be slacker. This will provide stimulus, but in my opinion the govt deficit reduction plan, with its zelous cuts are creating a weak economy, and due to its fragile nature: economic growth is slowing as a result. This flawed rhetoric of the chancedllor to impose these draconian cuts in governemnt spending and destruction of the public sector, is that if we alter our economic plan (say increase capital spending in a keynsian manner), the international markets will have our balls, which will in turn make borrowing more expenisve. This is absolute bolloks,the markets are more concerned about the sovreign debt crisis in the eurozone. This political manovering by the treasury is halting our recovery, and along with osbourne spouting bile 'that we we were like greece' is harming business and consumer confidance, we could see us slip into a double dip recession. Arsehole.

Keynsian economic theory espouses that you should spend your way out of a recession, but have a surplus during times of growth.

Where were all these 'Keynsian' disciples when Labour were running up an eye-watering deficit during the longest period of economic growth on record?

I can't understand why they weren't kicking up a fuss at such a betrayal of those principles at the time.

Strange, especially given the voracity at which they seem to support his theories now...

So I take it your one of these 'We inherited this mess from labour.' Governments can run budget deficits, as long as you can honour your debts. The only country who has consistently had a budget surplus in Europe is Norway. What get's me more is the Tories before in 2007 repeatedly said their party was committed to Labour's spending plan. I'm not a deficit denier, but it wasn’t labour's overspending is was a global financial crisis, and due to our over dependence services particularly the banking sector, we were susceptible the most.

^ This is a very fair point.

The only party who spotted the increasing problem with public spending were the Libdems.

Your point about Norway merely serves to underline the feckless way that the rest of Europe has been running their economies for the last 30 years. As if the whole of Europe running an enduring and ever expanding deficit is somehow normal.

 

[city diehard]

A lot of words to say "I'm against the cuts." SWP's back

I'm not against the cuts, we need to recude our budget deficit, but not at the pace that it is currently at.

Keynsian economic theory espouses that you should spend your way out of a recession, but have a surplus during times of growth.

Where were all these 'Keynsian' disciples when Labour were running up an eye-watering deficit during the longest period of economic growth on record?

I can't understand why they weren't kicking up a fuss at such a betrayal of those principles at the time.

Strange, especially given the voracity at which they seem to support his theories now...

So I take it your one of these 'We inherited this mess from labour.' Governments can run budget deficits, as long as you can honour your debts. The only country who has consistently had a budget surplus in Europe is Norway. What get's me more is the Tories before in 2007 repeatedly said their party was committed to Labour's spending plan. I'm not a deficit denier, but it wasn’t labour's overspending is was a global financial crisis, and due to our over dependence services particularly the banking sector, we were susceptible the most.

^ This is a very fair point.

The only party who spotted the increasing problem with public spending were the Libdems.

Your point about Norway merely serves to underline the feckless way that the rest of Europe has been running their economies for the last 30 years. As if the whole of Europe running an enduring and ever expanding deficit is somehow normal.

Well that you could argue is that this 3 decade long neoliberal era is in need and require government intervention and to utilise its autonomy to repair the ills of capitalism.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Well that you could argue is that this 3 decade long neoliberal era is in need and require government intervention and to utilise its autonomy to repair the ills of capitalism.

^ Is it just me or does that make absolutely no sense?

 

[metalblue]

A lot of words to say "I'm against the cuts." SWP's back

I'm not against the cuts, we need to recude our budget deficit, but not at the pace that it is currently at.

Keynsian economic theory espouses that you should spend your way out of a recession, but have a surplus during times of growth.

Where were all these 'Keynsian' disciples when Labour were running up an eye-watering deficit during the longest period of economic growth on record?

I can't understand why they weren't kicking up a fuss at such a betrayal of those principles at the time.

Strange, especially given the voracity at which they seem to support his theories now...

So I take it your one of these 'We inherited this mess from labour.' Governments can run budget deficits, as long as you can honour your debts. The only country who has consistently had a budget surplus in Europe is Norway. What get's me more is the Tories before in 2007 repeatedly said their party was committed to Labour's spending plan. I'm not a deficit denier, but it wasn’t labour's overspending is was a global financial crisis, and due to our over dependence services particularly the banking sector, we were susceptible the most.

^ This is a very fair point.

The only party who spotted the increasing problem with public spending were the Libdems.

Your point about Norway merely serves to underline the feckless way that the rest of Europe has been running their economies for the last 30 years. As if the whole of Europe running an enduring and ever expanding deficit is somehow normal.

It is a fair point but it should be remembered this was before Brown increased public spending by £90bn per year.

Old world governments, with few exceptions, were on a path of debt fueled growth. The financial crisis was neither the trigger or the cause of the spending cuts in itself - it was a lucky excuse for Brown & Co. Once the banks figured that the absence of USD lending meant leveraging party was over it was time, if you were lucky, for significantly less (and far more expensive) availability of credit and then the wheels came off the debt fueled growth model that had been the picture of early 2000's growth in the old world economy.

I do agree with city diehard's our over reliance on the financial services model point thou.<br /><br />-- Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:44 am --<br /><br />

Well that you could argue is that this 3 decade long neoliberal era is in need and require government intervention and to utilise its autonomy to repair the ills of capitalism.

^ Is it just me or does that make absolutely no sense?

Nope

 

[Balti]

Printing money means inflation

Us savers will be happy if interest rates rise at long last.

Time to get those mortgages on fixed rates ;-)

 

[SWP's back]

Printing money means inflation

Us savers will be happy if interest rates rise at long last.

Time to get those mortgages on fixed rates ;-)

I wouldn't for atleast 2 years. You savers will see no increase in that time.

 

[city diehard]

I'm not against the cuts, we need to recude our budget deficit, but not at the pace that it is currently at.



So I take it your one of these 'We inherited this mess from labour.' Governments can run budget deficits, as long as you can honour your debts. The only country who has consistently had a budget surplus in Europe is Norway. What get's me more is the Tories before in 2007 repeatedly said their party was committed to Labour's spending plan. I'm not a deficit denier, but it wasn’t labour's overspending is was a global financial crisis, and due to our over dependence services particularly the banking sector, we were susceptible the most.

^ This is a very fair point.

The only party who spotted the increasing problem with public spending were the Libdems.

Your point about Norway merely serves to underline the feckless way that the rest of Europe has been running their economies for the last 30 years. As if the whole of Europe running an enduring and ever expanding deficit is somehow normal.

It is a fair point but it should be remembered this was before Brown increased public spending by £90bn per year.

Old world governments, with few exceptions, were on a path of debt fueled growth. The financial crisis was neither the trigger or the cause of the spending cuts in itself - it was a lucky excuse for Brown & Co. Once the banks figured that the absence of USD lending meant leveraging party was over it was time, if you were lucky, for significantly less (and far more expensive) availability of credit and then the wheels came off the debt fueled growth model that had been the picture of early 2000's growth in the old world economy.

I do agree with city diehard's our over reliance on the financial services model point thou.

-- Sun Oct 09, 2011 10:44 am --

Well that you could argue is that this 3 decade long neoliberal era is in need and require government intervention and to utilise its autonomy to repair the ills of capitalism.

^ Is it just me or does that make absolutely no sense?

Nope

Just means that with neo classical economics, where business friendly governemnts have been very free market, with thatcher then new labour. That it could be argued, that a rollback of teh state should take place, and more government intervention into the markets should take place-if that means more regulation then so be it.

 

[SWP's back]

Just means that with neo classical economics, where business friendly governemnts have been very free market, with thatcher then new labour. That it could be argued, that a rollback of teh state should take place, and more government intervention into the markets should take place-if that means more regulation then so be it.

Go on. Can you explain how you mean? Is this going forward or it should have been in place? Which markets? How do you mean "intervention"? More regulation than now or more regulation than in 2007? Regulation against what? Who is the regulator going to be? Wouldn't a "roll-back" mean the exact opposite by the way?

You sound awfully left wing and sorry if you feel I am being a pedant again but I have noted you several times using a lot of words to say very little. Your post above sounds awfully like a voxpop from someone that takes some interest in the subject matter, enough to read an opinion and repeat it on a forum at any rate. Whether you can explain it or back it up we'll see.

ps - I think you will find that all governments the world over try and be "business friendly", it's kinda how an economy works.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Andrew Bailey at the BoE is utterly clueless. Raising interest rates to bring down inflation while openly stating at the same time that its largely pressures external to the UK are causing inflation. Throw in a lack of employable people caused by this government's complete inability to manage immigration properly and itsnot surprising we have high inflation. All the while this useless government and their pathetic watchdogs sits by for months and do nothing about blatant profiteering by Oil Companies, Energy Firms, Banks, Petrol Retailers etc which all adds to inflation. The Housing Market has already stalled. Construction and Development will stall, throw in Sunacks and Hunts huge tax rises on S and M businesses and recession is just round the corner.

Food inflation is running at 17% are we supposed to eat less food??

Bailey has never been able to predict anything correctly. Not even 6 mths ahead. So why anyone should have any faith in his predictions today is beyond comprehension. He's just puppet for this utterly useless government.

 

[Corky]

The good news for inflation is unemployment is going up.