The General Election Thread

[JoeMercer'sWay]

As for the bit on manufacturing. Read this <a class="postlink" href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab-11de-98ca-00144feab49a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab ... ab49a.html</a>

Subscription only. Any chance of a copy/paste for us plebeians, my Lord?

Decline in manufacturing greater under Labour than with Thatcher

By Chris Giles, Economics Editor

The importance of manufacturing to the economy declined more rapidly under Labour administrations since 1997 than it did during the Margaret Thatcher era, according to a Financial Times study.

The big winners in the same period were bankers, estate agents and public sector workers, whose share of output increased under the Labour governments of Tony Blair, the former prime minister, and Gordon Brown, his successor. The findings about the state of the economy were uncovered during a study of data held by the Office for National Statistics.

Manufacturing accounted for more than 20 per cent of the economy in 1997, when Labour came to power critical of the country having too narrow an industrial base. But by 2007, that share had declined to 12.4 per cent.

Although the recession of the early 1980s dealt a permanent blow to the industrial heartlands, the relative devastation of manufacturing during the past 12 years has been almost three times faster.

Manufacturing also bore the brunt of output losses in the most recent recession, sending its share of the economy lower, to a little over 11 per cent.

The near halving of the importance of manufacturing to the economy over 12 years is in stark contrast to the reduction from 25.8 per cent to 22.5 per cent of output under the Conservative governments of the now Baroness Thatcher.
Labour ministers still cite the 1980s as the period when the economy changed.

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, told the FT last week: "In the 1980s and 1990s, we as a country did not do enough to encourage manufacturing and this approach led to colossal economic damage."

As manufacturing has declined, other sectors have been on the rise. Under Labour, real estate has risen from 12.6 per cent of the economy to an estimated 16.2 per cent. Banks, building societies and other financial services have seen their share of output rise from 6.6 per cent to 9.1 per cent.
Health and education have gained importance as the government devoted greater resources to the sectors since 2000. Healthcare has increased its share of the economy from 6.2 per cent to an estimated 7.9 per cent this year, while education has risen from 5.3 per cent to 6.2 per cent.

 

[SWP's back]

As for the bit on manufacturing. Read this <a class="postlink" href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab-11de-98ca-00144feab49a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab ... ab49a.html</a>

Subscription only. Any chance of a copy/paste for us plebeians, my Lord?

One better. This is the FTs source:

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7617/economics/economic-growth-during-great-moderation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7617/ ... oderation/</a>

Repeated by everyone's favourite quality newspaper in punchy tabloid style here

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1232897/Manufacturing-decline-Labour-greater-Margaret-Thatcher.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tcher.html</a>

 

[aguero93:20]

As for the bit on manufacturing. Read this <a class="postlink" href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab-11de-98ca-00144feab49a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab ... ab49a.html</a>

Subscription only. Any chance of a copy/paste for us plebeians, my Lord?

Decline in manufacturing greater under Labour than with Thatcher

By Chris Giles, Economics Editor

The importance of manufacturing to the economy declined more rapidly under Labour administrations since 1997 than it did during the Margaret Thatcher era, according to a Financial Times study.

The big winners in the same period were bankers, estate agents and public sector workers, whose share of output increased under the Labour governments of Tony Blair, the former prime minister, and Gordon Brown, his successor. The findings about the state of the economy were uncovered during a study of data held by the Office for National Statistics.

Manufacturing accounted for more than 20 per cent of the economy in 1997, when Labour came to power critical of the country having too narrow an industrial base. But by 2007, that share had declined to 12.4 per cent.

Although the recession of the early 1980s dealt a permanent blow to the industrial heartlands, the relative devastation of manufacturing during the past 12 years has been almost three times faster.

Manufacturing also bore the brunt of output losses in the most recent recession, sending its share of the economy lower, to a little over 11 per cent.

The near halving of the importance of manufacturing to the economy over 12 years is in stark contrast to the reduction from 25.8 per cent to 22.5 per cent of output under the Conservative governments of the now Baroness Thatcher.
Labour ministers still cite the 1980s as the period when the economy changed.

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, told the FT last week: "In the 1980s and 1990s, we as a country did not do enough to encourage manufacturing and this approach led to colossal economic damage."

As manufacturing has declined, other sectors have been on the rise. Under Labour, real estate has risen from 12.6 per cent of the economy to an estimated 16.2 per cent. Banks, building societies and other financial services have seen their share of output rise from 6.6 per cent to 9.1 per cent.
Health and education have gained importance as the government devoted greater resources to the sectors since 2000. Healthcare has increased its share of the economy from 6.2 per cent to an estimated 7.9 per cent this year, while education has risen from 5.3 per cent to 6.2 per cent.

That's in percentage terms in an overall growing economy that experienced a massive boom in services. It could probably be put in a different context entirely by someone who could be bothered.

 

[SWP's back]

Subscription only. Any chance of a copy/paste for us plebeians, my Lord?

Decline in manufacturing greater under Labour than with Thatcher

By Chris Giles, Economics Editor

The importance of manufacturing to the economy declined more rapidly under Labour administrations since 1997 than it did during the Margaret Thatcher era, according to a Financial Times study.

The big winners in the same period were bankers, estate agents and public sector workers, whose share of output increased under the Labour governments of Tony Blair, the former prime minister, and Gordon Brown, his successor. The findings about the state of the economy were uncovered during a study of data held by the Office for National Statistics.

Manufacturing accounted for more than 20 per cent of the economy in 1997, when Labour came to power critical of the country having too narrow an industrial base. But by 2007, that share had declined to 12.4 per cent.

Although the recession of the early 1980s dealt a permanent blow to the industrial heartlands, the relative devastation of manufacturing during the past 12 years has been almost three times faster.

Manufacturing also bore the brunt of output losses in the most recent recession, sending its share of the economy lower, to a little over 11 per cent.

The near halving of the importance of manufacturing to the economy over 12 years is in stark contrast to the reduction from 25.8 per cent to 22.5 per cent of output under the Conservative governments of the now Baroness Thatcher.
Labour ministers still cite the 1980s as the period when the economy changed.

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, told the FT last week: "In the 1980s and 1990s, we as a country did not do enough to encourage manufacturing and this approach led to colossal economic damage."

As manufacturing has declined, other sectors have been on the rise. Under Labour, real estate has risen from 12.6 per cent of the economy to an estimated 16.2 per cent. Banks, building societies and other financial services have seen their share of output rise from 6.6 per cent to 9.1 per cent.
Health and education have gained importance as the government devoted greater resources to the sectors since 2000. Healthcare has increased its share of the economy from 6.2 per cent to an estimated 7.9 per cent this year, while education has risen from 5.3 per cent to 6.2 per cent.

That's in percentage terms in an overall growing economy that experienced a massive boom in services. It could probably be put in a different context entirely by someone who could be bothered.

One could argue the semantics of it but it puts paid to the notion that Thatcher decimated manufacturing when in relative terms, Blair and Brown oversaw the fastest demise of manufacturing in relative terms as a percentage of GDP.

 

[aguero93:20]

Decline in manufacturing greater under Labour than with Thatcher

By Chris Giles, Economics Editor

The importance of manufacturing to the economy declined more rapidly under Labour administrations since 1997 than it did during the Margaret Thatcher era, according to a Financial Times study.

The big winners in the same period were bankers, estate agents and public sector workers, whose share of output increased under the Labour governments of Tony Blair, the former prime minister, and Gordon Brown, his successor. The findings about the state of the economy were uncovered during a study of data held by the Office for National Statistics.

Manufacturing accounted for more than 20 per cent of the economy in 1997, when Labour came to power critical of the country having too narrow an industrial base. But by 2007, that share had declined to 12.4 per cent.

Although the recession of the early 1980s dealt a permanent blow to the industrial heartlands, the relative devastation of manufacturing during the past 12 years has been almost three times faster.

Manufacturing also bore the brunt of output losses in the most recent recession, sending its share of the economy lower, to a little over 11 per cent.

The near halving of the importance of manufacturing to the economy over 12 years is in stark contrast to the reduction from 25.8 per cent to 22.5 per cent of output under the Conservative governments of the now Baroness Thatcher.
Labour ministers still cite the 1980s as the period when the economy changed.

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, told the FT last week: "In the 1980s and 1990s, we as a country did not do enough to encourage manufacturing and this approach led to colossal economic damage."

As manufacturing has declined, other sectors have been on the rise. Under Labour, real estate has risen from 12.6 per cent of the economy to an estimated 16.2 per cent. Banks, building societies and other financial services have seen their share of output rise from 6.6 per cent to 9.1 per cent.
Health and education have gained importance as the government devoted greater resources to the sectors since 2000. Healthcare has increased its share of the economy from 6.2 per cent to an estimated 7.9 per cent this year, while education has risen from 5.3 per cent to 6.2 per cent.

That's in percentage terms in an overall growing economy that experienced a massive boom in services. It could probably be put in a different context entirely by someone who could be bothered.

One could argue the semantics of it but it puts paid to the notion that Thatcher decimated manufacturing when in relative terms, Blair and Brown oversaw the fastest demise of manufacturing in relative terms as a percentage of GDP.

I'd look at it more from the angle that Thatcher's economic policies saw jobs lost in manufacturing that weren't replaced in alternate sectors, the drop in manufacturing under Blair and Brown coincided with a huge drop in unemployment as other sectors boomed and the overall economy grew. Bigger pictures. All 3 of them were cunts and the whole of Europe needs to grow it's manufacturing sector though.

 

[Damocles]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

 

[halfcenturyup]

You should use whichever part of your body makes you feel the best.

Trying to decide how I will spoil my paper. Big cock and balls or a massive pair of tits?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

As for the bit on manufacturing. Read this <a class="postlink" href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab-11de-98ca-00144feab49a.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c257da6-dfab ... ab49a.html</a>

Subscription only. Any chance of a copy/paste for us plebeians, my Lord?

Decline in manufacturing greater under Labour than with Thatcher

That article refers to Manufacturing's relative share of GDP, which is a very different thing to output per se. That was always likely to happen as industrial output moved to a lower cost base offshore and other sectors grew & took up the slack.

In absolute terms, it reached an output peak in 2007. That is a cast iron fact. In other words it grew but not as fast as the Service sector.

 

[SWP's back]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

And that happened under Thatcher!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Damocles]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

I'd agree with that - that a good manufacturing base is the bricks and mortar of a healthy economy. I just don't see how the wild success of the service sector in comparison to the manufacturing sector which has grown in real terms means that the Government fucked up.

Isn't this an example of what Thatcher referred to whereby people are asking for us to be less successful to be more equal?

 

[metalblue]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

And that happened under Thatcher!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually the biggest decline happened in the 1970s under both Wilson and Callaghan who believed the UK produced a better per head capita with the newly discovered north sea oil than manufacturing. And hence the service industry was born.

 

[tonea2003]

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

And that happened under Thatcher!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually the biggest decline happened in the 1970s under both Wilson and Callaghan who believed the UK produced a better per head capita with the newly discovered north sea oil than manufacturing. And hence the service industry was born.

bottom line is both conservative and labour have presided over big declines, so its a bit of pays your money and make your choice

 

[tonea2003]

is it me or has nigel farage's wiki page been hijacked with a big ed milliband piccie

 

[Corky]

I don't understand this logic.

That says that we used to produce 10 frying pans a week. Now we product 15 frying pans a week. However the total number of objects that people pay for has increased so despite the fact that we're producing more frying pans, it's actually a sign of failure?

What possible way could the computerisation of the UK and the change to a service based industry leading to a higher GDP be a bad thing because the split towards frying pan based economy is now lessened but still growing?

That doesn't make any sense.

Because it's all relative and it's often said that the UK is too reliant on the service sector and our manufacturing base is much smaller than it should be.

I'd agree with that - that a good manufacturing base is the bricks and mortar of a healthy economy. I just don't see how the wild success of the service sector in comparison to the manufacturing sector which has grown in real terms means that the Government fucked up.

Isn't this an example of what Thatcher referred to whereby people are asking for us to be less successful to be more equal?

The decline of the manufacturing sector looks a little bit worse than it really is. Jobs that used to count as manufacturing that are outsourced to agencies or third parties now count as service sector.

 

[Two Gun Bob]

I'm surprised UKIP haven't used this old Tory poster.

[bigimg]https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/11203183_10152893371279352_6955419550072583514_n.jpg?oh=67d14d7a1104c7be95c0ddaf01f93af5&oe=55C61162&__gda__=1439719028_cc58738e8007ba480acd05850a388d7c[/bigimg]

Nigel loves you Stony, Nigel loves everyone.
A pleasant and amiable character who has conducted his campaign magnificently.
A little too much emphasis mais oui with the pint at the pub prop but the most level and straightest arrow in this campaigns Quiver

I disagree with your face the facts (tongue in cheeky) poster.
Rochdale in the last election carried a 90% Labour vote
And yet nearly everyone there has a colored neighbor
Maybe the conservative or Uk-ipper votes were somehow spoiled

I have to say this has been an absolute sheer masterpiece of thread-ometry
And I would therefore like to take this opportunity in the spirit of fair play to wish all parties bon chance and god speed.

And let the electorate now and without further to do vote forward the next government that hopefully will project us all into a modicum of prosperity strength and harmony that encompasses a sense of pride and belonging in this our fine old nation.

Special thanks to all the contributors on this thread who have given lesser mortals such as me a much better understanding of party political shenanigans
Amen to that brothers

What I mean is it's been a really good read ;

 

[Bill]

Where do we start?

Entered an illegal war after lying to the House and population about Iraqs WMDs, later killing a whistleblower.
Presided over the greatest post war reduction in manufacturing.
Sold the Gold reserves for a record real time low to buy off the electorate with increased public spending
Spent £800m on the Millenium Dome
Ran a deficit whilst enjoying a period of Tory started growth (against Keynes who they supposedly subscribe to)
Fucked the NHS up with ridiculous PFIs
Allowed the largest immigration in 1000 years, 3m in 13 years
Saw unemployment rise over their administration (again)
Gave away the UK rebate costing £9bn

What about the irreparable damage done to this country between 1979 and 1990 by the NazisTorys, where we are still suffering because of their policies

Have to pick on the the Millenium Dome
Yes, huge waste of money, but it pales into insignificance when compared to HS2

Ha ha. Total desperation.

 

[aguero93:20]

I'm surprised UKIP haven't used this old Tory poster.

[bigimg]https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/11203183_10152893371279352_6955419550072583514_n.jpg?oh=67d14d7a1104c7be95c0ddaf01f93af5&oe=55C61162&__gda__=1439719028_cc58738e8007ba480acd05850a388d7c[/bigimg]

Nigel loves you Stony, Nigel loves everyone.
A pleasant and amiable character who has conducted his campaign magnificently.
A little too much emphasis mais oui with the pint at the pub prop but the most level and straightest arrow in this campaigns Quiver

I disagree with your face the facts (tongue in cheeky) poster.
Rochdale in the last election carried a 90% Labour vote
And yet nearly everyone there has a colored neighbor
Maybe the conservative or Uk-ipper votes were somehow spoiled

I have to say this has been an absolute sheer masterpiece of thread-ometry
And I would therefore like to take this opportunity in the spirit of fair play to wish all parties bon chance and god speed.

And let the electorate now and without further to do vote forward the next government that hopefully will project us all into a modicum of prosperity strength and harmony that encompasses a sense of pride and belonging in this our fine old nation.

Special thanks to all the contributors on this thread who have given lesser mortals such as me a much better understanding of party political shenanigans
Amen to that brothers

What I mean is it's been a really good read ;

Nigel Farage has morphed into Jesus overnight it seems. :)

 

[Bluemanc100]

And what damage did they do between 1997 & 2010? Up to 2008 it was a period of uninterrupted growth.

It constantly both amazes and sickens me how much lying shit the right-wing red-tops get away with peddling.

Where do we start?

Entered an illegal war after lying to the House and population about Iraqs WMDs, later killing a whistleblower.
Presided over the greatest post war reduction in manufacturing.
Sold the Gold reserves for a record real time low to buy off the electorate with increased public spending
Spent £800m on the Millenium Dome
Ran a deficit whilst enjoying a period of Tory started growth (against Keynes who they supposedly subscribe to)
Fucked the NHS up with ridiculous PFIs
Allowed the largest immigration in 1000 years, 3m in 13 years
Saw unemployment rise over their administration (again)
Gave away the UK rebate costing £9bn

The Iraq war I'll give you but that was Blair's personal desire to please George Bush, rather than party policy. Had it been Cameron, I've no doubt the outcome would have been the same.

Manufacturing output actually reached a record high in 2007, according to the ONS, so that one's bollox.

Holding gold reserves has no value as far as a government is concerned. It's a speculative asset and in fact the sale of such reserves was restricted by international agreement after that, as our sale drove the price down, not up. The subsequent rise was largely due to the knowledge that a large scale sale couldn't happen, except maybe under extraordinary circumstances. There was therefore virtually no downside risk in buying gold from then on.

The Millenium Dome was a crock of shit but it was originally the idea of John Major's government but was expanded by Blair's. The money came from the National Lottery (£600m) and sale of tickets (£190m) so not really public funds.

The money from the NHS had to come from somewhere. It either had to be borrowed or privately financed. Given that you said Labour borrowed too much, you can't have it both ways.

Unemployment had fallen from its peak in 1997, when Labour took power, up to 2008. Obviously the recession increased it. It's never come near the levels seen under the Thatcher government. So if you want to get on your high horse about unemployment, that's when the worst damage was done.

Under Labour, UK net borrowing reached a peak of 3.5% of GDP in 2004/5 prior to the recession. 2014/15 it will be something like 5.5% and is estimated to be be 4.2% in the current fiscal year. So if borrowing was out of control under a fiscally irresponsible Labour administration, how would you class it now, when it's supposedly under control?

I'm not particularly pro-European but let's not forget which party negotiated our original entry and signed the disastrous Maastricht treaty.

You can't speculate on whether another leader would be totally dishonest. Cameron didn't take us into an unjust war and costs many lives........... Blair did

 

[the god Gerry Gow]

Not a big fan of the false man of the people act of Nigel Farage but thought it was brilliant last night.

Rohit Kachroo thought he would be a clever twat and said "so your out of a job if you lose tomorrow. Smirk smirk"

Farage looked at him and said " yes I guess I am, I better go and do some more campaigning then".

Kachroo stood looking at him and didn't know what to say.

Politician 1 Journalist 0