How many more U turns will this bloody government make?

[carmanmemoranda]

Well they deserved to fail if that's true.

It's a shame you don't understand what you post really

I just remember the BBC and labour almost spitting out the word in disgust when talking about anything that resulted from government spending being anything less than unlimited.

It was bandied with pride by the tories. Nothing wrong with details being made clear.

It forced their hand, into becoming as useless as labour, which is what got us where we now are.

They made their own fortune and misfortunes .

They were replaced by labour because of it.

Don't blame labour for tory failings

 

[ellal]

The OP says "How many more U turns will this bloody government make?"

Politicians do it all the time due to circumstances and public opinion...

The OP has a dislike for Labour, which is his prerogative...

However what he doesn't understand is that those who may have chosen Labour don't agree with all their policies...

The Digital ID idea is one such policy that is a complete folly!

But the OP is also on record as saying that he agrees with ALL reform policies, even though he can't/won't tell us the details of most of them...

A very important one of course regards taxation, but his leader/party of choice have done a huge U-turn on their policy, whether that be at local or future national level...

So one has to question why mottie isn't so vociferous in his criticism when it comes to non labour U-turns

 

[ellal]

Austerity arose from the banks spending what they didn’t have.

Let me correct that for you....

Austerity arose from the banks lending what they didn’t have, and were then mostly bailed out by corrupt governments at a huge cost to the general population!

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

Then the tories are even dafter than I thought, giving the muppet media a hammer to hit them with.

This was the point at which the tories became new-new-labour, which ultimately got them booted out due to their uncontrolled spending. Sadly replaced by new-old-labour, we're back in the 1970s now.

 

[blup]

Let me correct that for you....

Austerity arose from the banks lending what they didn’t have, and were then mostly bailed out by corrupt governments at a huge cost to the general population!

Austerity came about because banks lent recklessly to ex bankrupts and others with poor credit ratings. Fred the shed and his ilk bought up this debt which turned out to be worthless. Austerity was a result of poorly regulated greedy money lenders, not Labor policies, although Brown must take his share of the blame for making it worse for this country than the European banks who had tighter rules. The PM/Chancellor have to raise taxes to continue pay the interest on the billions that were “borrowed “ to prevent a meltdown of the banking system. Those interest rates are higher because the Trussmini budget spooked the city.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

Austerity came about because banks lent recklessly to ex bankrupts and others with poor credit ratings. Fred the shed and his ilk bought up this debt which turned out to be worthless. Austerity was a result of poorly regulated greedy money lenders, not Labor policies, although Brown must take his share of the blame for making it worse for this country than the European banks who had tighter rules. The PM/Chancellor have to raise taxes to continue pay the interest on the billions that were “borrowed “ to prevent a meltdown of the banking system. Those interest rates are higher because the Trussmini budget spooked the city.

A sensible analysis. I'd add that Broon could have let the banks go bust and guaranteed deposits. Whether that would have been better or worse long-term, I don't know. I didn't hear any discussion of this idea, they saw they were in trouble and lobbed a load of money at them without pausing. But it would have flushed out a load of overpaid crooks from the system and given them a massive warning for the future.

 

[motorbiking]

Cutting out certainly doesn't improve things

There of course is no certainty.

 

[motorbiking]

 

[carmanmemoranda]

There of course is no certainty.

Can you attempt to explain how cutting things at national level improves our infrastructure and quality ?

 

[ellal]

I'd add that Broon could have let the banks go bust and guaranteed deposits. Whether that would have been better or worse long-term, I don't know. I didn't hear any discussion of this idea, they saw they were in trouble and lobbed a load of money at them without pausing. But it would have flushed out a load of overpaid crooks from the system and given them a massive warning for the future.

The only country I know of that took that approach you mention was Iceland...

Whilst in the short term there was a lot of pain, long term it hasn't turned out that badly for them!

"Iceland's approach to its 2008 financial crash was highly unorthodox, focusing on
protecting its citizens and domestic economy rather than bailing out its major banks. Key elements included letting the banks fail, imposing capital controls, prosecuting bankers, providing debt relief, and maintaining social safety nets"

"While the country experienced a deep recession (GDP dropped by 10% between Q3 2007 and Q3 2010), the approach led to a strong recovery. The economy returned to positive GDP growth by 2011, public debt declined significantly, and the country has since experienced robust growth, largely fueled by a tourism boom and a diversified economy"

 

[motorbiking]

They were aware that most of the investments in Icelandic banks were foreign, so they basically just defaulted on debts and killed their banking industry.

 

[blup]

A sensible analysis. I'd add that Broon could have let the banks go bust and guaranteed deposits. Whether that would have been better or worse long-term, I don't know. I didn't hear any discussion of this idea, they saw they were in trouble and lobbed a load of money at them without pausing. But it would have flushed out a load of overpaid crooks from the system and given them a massive warning for the future.

That would be like not having lockdown, a libertarians paradise but hugely harmful to a lot of people

 

[Dec27]

Maybe some truth would help:

David Cameron's conference speech in 2009.
11 uses of the word "austerity".

The United Kingdom government austerity programme was a fiscal policy that was adopted for a period in the early 21st century following the era of the Great Recession. Coalition and Conservative governments in office from 2010 to 2019 used the term
.
.
The first period was one of the most extensive deficit reduction programmes seen in any advanced economy since the Second World War, with emphasis placed on shrinking the state, rather than consolidating fiscally as was more common elsewhere in Europe.
.
.
The Conservative-led government claimed that austerity served as a deficit reduction programme...Most prominent economists agree that austerity is ineffective if the aim is to bring about a recovery from recession...
.
.
There was no central function or risk assessment made to predict the impact of the austerity programme on services and budgets in the long term. There were however "big strategic moves" to protect groups more likely to vote Conservative, and make cuts elsewhere.

I’ve no interest in the argument.

Thanks for your response though

 

[motorbiking]

That would be like not having lockdown, a libertarians paradise but hugely harmful to a lot of people

Explain Sweden

 

[ellal]

They were aware that most of the investments in Icelandic banks were foreign, so they basically just defaulted on debts and killed their banking industry.

Actually they defaulted and then repayed back all their debts, leaving the country in a far better position than most others...

And their banking industry is now as robust as it was before...

Sadly it looks like their politicians now are no different to the ones that turned a blind eye previously...

History will repeat itself!