Theresa May

[Chippy_boy]

Just out of interest, how many of their 26 years in power since Margaret Thatcher was first elected have the Tories run a surplus? Presumably if you're demanding if of Labour (after a global financial crash) then the Tories must have a pretty strong record on running a budget surplus?

No, I was merely pointing out primary school maths. If you have A (the debt) and you add B (the deficit) to it every year then A +_B + B + B + B + B... is more than ****ing A.

But Since you mention it, no the Tories' record in this department isn't great either. However they sometimes leave office with the national debt lower than when they came in. Labour NEVER do. (Barring a brief period of a few months about 100 years ago IIRC). A vote for Labour is a vote for putting up public debt, proven countless times.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Catching up on recent posts...

The car analogy is actually flawed, since in the car analogy, debt is actually distance. And deficit is rate of change of distance, i.e. speed.

So the correct analogy is that we wish to stop the car no further forward than at a STOP line which we are speeding towards. Labour are driving and after years of government they have sped past the STOP line, but instead of braking they and continue driving, and in fact they put their foot down, accelerating away past it. The Tories take over the wheel but the car is doing 150 mph. They apply the brakes and after years of slowing, the car is finally only doing about 30 mph.

Labour supporters then have the ****ing cheek of criticising the Tories that the car is further from line than when they left office. OF COURSE IT IS. Only once the car has stopped and started reversing backwards can we get nearer the line.

Who sped past the line? Labour.
Who continued to accelerate? Labour
Who's responsible for us being so far away from it? Labour
Who's fault is it, it is taking so long to stop the car? Labour (because the speed we were going at)
Who's fault is it that we further away than when Labour left office? Labour

 

[robbieh]

Catching up on recent posts...

The car analogy is actually flawed, since in the car analogy, debt is actually distance. And deficit is rate of change of distance, i.e. speed.

So the correct analogy is that we wish to stop the car no further forward than at a STOP line which we are speeding towards. Labour are driving and after years of government they have sped past the STOP line, but instead of braking they and continue driving, and in fact they put their foot down, accelerating away past it. The Tories take over the wheel but the car is doing 150 mph. They apply the brakes and after years of slowing, the car is finally only doing about 30 mph.

Labour supporters then have the ****ing cheek of criticising the Tories that the car is further from line than when they left office. OF COURSE IT IS. Only once the car has stopped and started reversing backwards can we get nearer the line.

Who sped past the line? Labour.
Who continued to accelerate? Labour
Who's responsible for us being so far away from it? Labour
Who's fault is it, it is taking so long to stop the car? Labour (because the speed we were going at)
Who's fault is it that we further away than when Labour left office? Labour

Either you know this is lies and are repeating it for political reasons or you are misinformed.
The deficit during the Blair years was moderate. The deficit soared after the 2008 socialization of the debt problems within the financial system.
Now you can argue about whether we should have rescued said institutions but to suggest as you do that the deficit was caused by Labour overspending on public services is disingenuous.

 

[Damocles]

However they sometimes leave office with the national debt lower than when they came in. Labour NEVER do

This isn't the slam dunk that Tories often think it is.

Labour are the social investment party. If you have tons of social investment and the country is running on a surplus, why would you ever vote them out?

 

[Damocles]

Either you know this is lies and are repeating it for political reasons or you are misinformed.
The deficit during the Blair years was moderate. The deficit soared after the 2008 socialization of the debt problems within the financial system.
Now you can argue about whether we should have rescued said institutions but to suggest as you do that the deficit was caused by Labour overspending on public services is disingenuous.

Yeah to blame Labour in any way for the 2008 collapse is highly partisan nonsense.

 

[robbieh]

Yeah to blame Labour in any way for the 2008 collapse is highly partisan nonsense.

In fact just checked further and from 98 until 02 they were running a surplus. From then on the deficit was similar but nevertheless lower than the Tory deficit during the early to mid 90s.

 

[CityStu]

Yeah to blame Labour in any way for the 2008 collapse is highly partisan nonsense.

Labour weren't at fault for the 2008 collapse, but they were heavily at fault for reducing the country's ability to manage such an event. We should have gone into that recession with a healthy surplus built over a substantial period of good growth, allowing us to maintain and invest in our public services through the recession when investment is needed. Running up any kind of deficit when the economy was performing incredibly well, was incredibly stupid.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Either you know this is lies and are repeating it for political reasons or you are misinformed.
The deficit during the Blair years was moderate. The deficit soared after the 2008 socialization of the debt problems within the financial system.
Now you can argue about whether we should have rescued said institutions but to suggest as you do that the deficit was caused by Labour overspending on public services is disingenuous.

I think you're reading into my post, what you want to hear, rather than what I actually wrote.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Yeah to blame Labour in any way for the 2008 collapse is highly partisan nonsense.

Yes, I agree that would be.

 

[robbieh]

I think you're reading into my post, what you want to hear, rather than what I actually wrote.

Your car analogy was quite clear thanks.