Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Vardinio'sCat]

18 hours ago, Webbo said:

You seem to have forgotten 2008?

 

I said domestically driven in my post, seems pretty clear to me!

[Vardinio'sCat]

15 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

In my post, I criticised Labour for running a deficit during a boom and for not regulating banks more. I could add other criticisms, as I have before: the inter-generational immorality of PFI schemes, restricting public spending too much 1997-2001 and certainly the Iraq invasion & lack of planning for the aftermath, which continues to cast a blight on the world via ISIS (though there are many factors in that - and I know you think Iraq was a good idea).

 

However, Howe's 1981 budget, the Lawson boom and Black Wednesday clearly weren't Labour's fault as they weren't in government.

 

While aspects of Labour economic policy may have contributed to the severity of the 2008 crash in the UK, the crash itself clearly was not Labour's fault either - unless you believe that Gordon Brown was selling sub-prime mortgages in the USA, speculating on dodgy, poorly understood derivatives on Wall Street, running Lehmann Bros and responsible for the entire global economy. 

 

Incidentally, the Tories cannot be blamed for everything that went wrong during their tenure, either. The UK has a host of structural problems: adjusting to post-imperial existence, institutionalised class conflict between unions and business, short-termism in business and politics, failure to invest in infrastructure & training, aging population etc. Governments of every persuasion have failed to resolve many of those problems, not just the Tories (though they've been in power for 25 of the last 38 years).

 

I heartily agree with this. Labour have made plenty of mistakes, but the economic competence thing has been overblown.

 

Imho, an (often ignored) important factor in the success of any govts economic policy is often the trends in the world economy. For example, Labour got lucky with the world economy during the Blair/Brown years, up until 2008, when they got destroyed by it.

 

Like with Napoleon, being a lucky chancellor is maybe just as important as being a good one!

 

 

[ozleicester]

5 hours ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Just saw the May / Python mash up on Twitter and immediately came here to see if it had been posted yet...

 

I see @Enderby Fox has done the honours... but come on, only 3 thumbs up? What's wrong with you all!

 

5 hours ago, Strokes said:

It was posted Sunday by @ozleicester I think.

Only two thumbs for me.. bloody racists!

[Buce]

3 hours ago, ozleicester said:

 

Only two thumbs for me.. bloody racists!

 

I went back especially to rep you, Oz, only to find that it wasn't embedded! No bloody wonder I missed it first time..

[Webbo]

6 hours ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

I said domestically driven in my post, seems pretty clear to me!

Gordon Brown eradicated boom and bust so how did it happen?

[Buce]

 

Almost half of highly skilled EU workers 'could leave UK in 5 years'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/27/eu-workers-leave-uk-deloitte-brexit

 

Plenty of time to train up our own people, right? Oh, wait..

 

Govt 'reneging on promise to fund 10.000 extra nursing places..'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/27/fund-extra-nursing-training-places-dropped-universities

[Alf Bentley]

7 hours ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

I said domestically driven in my post, seems pretty clear to me!

 

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

Gordon Brown eradicated boom and bust so how did it happen?

 

 

"Webbo's Groundsman Services - Our Mission is to move the goalposts"

 

How did it happen?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008

 

"The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and the 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. It began in 2007 with a crisis in the subprime mortgage market in the US, and developed into a full-blown international banking crisis with the collapse of the investment bank Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008. Excessive risk-taking by banks such as Lehman Brothers helped to magnify the financial impact globally. Massive bail-outs of financial institutions and other palliative monetary and fiscal policies were employed to prevent a possible collapse of the world financial system. The crisis was nonetheless followed by a global economic downturn, the Great Recession. The European debt crisis, a crisis in the banking system of the European countries using the euro, followed later".

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

Almost half of highly skilled EU workers 'could leave UK in 5 years'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/27/eu-workers-leave-uk-deloitte-brexit

 

Plenty of time to train up our own people, right? Oh, wait..

 

Govt 'reneging on promise to fund 10.000 extra nursing places..'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/27/fund-extra-nursing-training-places-dropped-universities

I'm sure we can get highly skilled people from non EU countries to fill the gap with targeted visas. Under the current system we are turning them away in their droves, to make way for uncontrolled mostly unskilled migrants from the EU.

[Strokes]

16 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

 

 

"Webbo's Groundsman Services - Our Mission is to move the goalposts"

 

How did it happen?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008

 

"The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and the 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. It began in 2007 with a crisis in the subprime mortgage market in the US, and developed into a full-blown international banking crisis with the collapse of the investment bank Lehman Brothers on September 15, 2008. Excessive risk-taking by banks such as Lehman Brothers helped to magnify the financial impact globally. Massive bail-outs of financial institutions and other palliative monetary and fiscal policies were employed to prevent a possible collapse of the world financial system. The crisis was nonetheless followed by a global economic downturn, the Great Recession. The European debt crisis, a crisis in the banking system of the European countries using the euro, followed later".

From everyone's favourite reputable source https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/australia-global-economic-crisis

 

The simple fact is that all of these countries went into the disaster-zone in 2008 because when the global financial crisis hurricane hit, they had high government debt and high budget deficits, which made them extremely vulnerable to adverse shocks. Had any one of these countries’ governments faced the crisis with zero government debt and consistent budget surpluses, they would have been considered pillars of strength rather than sources of weakness. What those European countries wanted for, in other words, was Australian treasurer Peter Costello running their budgets in the long lead-up to 2008.

Edited 27 June 2017 by Strokes

[ozleicester]

11 minutes ago, Strokes said:

From everyone's favourite reputable source https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/australia-global-economic-crisis

 

The simple fact is that all of these countries went into the disaster-zone in 2008 because when the global financial crisis hurricane hit, they had high government debt and high budget deficits, which made them extremely vulnerable to adverse shocks. Had any one of these countries’ governments faced the crisis with zero government debt and consistent budget surpluses, they would have been considered pillars of strength rather than sources of weakness. What those European countries wanted for, in other words, was Australian treasurer Peter Costello running their budgets in the long lead-up to 2008.

nope

[Buce]

17 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I'm sure we can get highly skilled people from non EU countries to fill the gap with targeted visas. Under the current system we are turning them away in their droves, to make way for uncontrolled mostly unskilled migrants from the EU.

 

I'm sure we can; but I thought that was what Brexit was all about for a lot of you - too many immigrants clogging up the system.

 

What happened to training our own people? I thought you were all for it?

[Strokes]

1 minute ago, Buce said:

 

I'm sure we can; but I thought that was what Brexit was all about for a lot of you - too many immigrants clogging up the system.

 

What happened to training our own people? I thought you were all for it?

I've never said that, there are many valuable immigrants that are needed in this country. There are many valuable ones wrongly turned away to make way for (for want of a better term) less valuable ones from the EU.

Numbers are not important, contribution is.

Im definitely up for training natives, you know this but it can't happen over night and that's why a controlled immigration policy is always going to be valuable.

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I've never said that, there are many valuable immigrants that are needed in this country. There are many valuable ones wrongly turned away to make way for (for want of a better term) less valuable ones from the EU.

 

Many did.

 

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Numbers are not important, contribution is.

Im definitely up for training natives, you know this but it can't happen over night and that's why a controlled immigration policy is always going to be valuable.

 

But we are not training our own people - the NHS is totally reliant on immigrant labour, and the Govt seems content for that to remain the case.

[Strokes]

Just now, Buce said:

 

Many did.

 

 

But we are not training our own people - the NHS is totally reliant on immigrant labour, and the Govt seems content for that to remain the case.

Many did, and many didn't.

 

Yeah and I'm not a fan of that policy at all, which is another reason I could not vote for them this time around.

[Guest MattP]

12 minutes ago, Buce said:

But we are not training our own people - the NHS is totally reliant on immigrant labour, and the Govt seems content for that to remain the case.

Totally reliant? 

 

That not a little bit OTT? I went to an NHS Xmas party last year and from memory less than 5% of the staff were immigrants, what's the national percentage?

 

I don't doubt a shortage would have an impact, certainly in social care, but I don't think we would be shutting down the whole if we couldn't get immigrant staff.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

Almost half of highly skilled EU workers 'could leave UK in 5 years'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/27/eu-workers-leave-uk-deloitte-brexit

 

Plenty of time to train up our own people, right? Oh, wait..

 

Govt 'reneging on promise to fund 10.000 extra nursing places..'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/27/fund-extra-nursing-training-places-dropped-universities

For respondents based outside the UK, the country was ranked as the most desirable place to work. 

 

We're doomed, no one wants to come here and work anymore. 

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, MattP said:

Totally reliant? 

 

That not a little bit OTT? I went to an NHS Xmas party last year and from memory less than 5% of the staff were immigrants, what's the national percentage?

 

I don't doubt a shortage would have an impact, certainly in social care, but I don't think we would be shutting down the whole if we couldn't get immigrant staff.

 

I wasn't offering it as an opinion - 26% of doctors and 11% of staff overall are from abroad:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-immigration-figures-latest-nhs-would-collapse-immigrants-experts-warn-a7208616.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11832744/Britains-economy-would-be-lost-without-immigration.html

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-nationals-immigration-health-service

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

From everyone's favourite reputable source https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/australia-global-economic-crisis

 

The simple fact is that all of these countries went into the disaster-zone in 2008 because when the global financial crisis hurricane hit, they had high government debt and high budget deficits, which made them extremely vulnerable to adverse shocks. Had any one of these countries’ governments faced the crisis with zero government debt and consistent budget surpluses, they would have been considered pillars of strength rather than sources of weakness. What those European countries wanted for, in other words, was Australian treasurer Peter Costello running their budgets in the long lead-up to 2008.

 

It's better to go into a global crisis with no debt than with moderate debt (by British standards). I've repeatedly accepted that UK debt made the crash a bit worse than it would otherwise have been - and that Labour were wrong to run a deficit during a boom 2002-2007 (they ran a surplus before then). They should have raised taxes in my view, but that's a political preference (Tories would prefer spending cuts). But public debt was only one factor affecting how different national economies performed in response to the global crash. 

 

These 2 links give a less slanted, less partial analysis:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-australia-ducked-the-crisis/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession_in_Oceania

 

So, aside from low debt, key factors in Australia weathering the storm were: proximity to the massive, rapidly-growing Chinese economy; high levels of trade with China; a mining boom & plentiful natural resources; high immigration; a stimulus in response to the crash; better-managed banks holding a lot less toxic assets.

 

In contrast, the German economy also had low debt and was running a surplus, but still suffered a recession. Because they didn't enjoy some of the Australian advantages and were more exposed to ill winds from the global economy. Germany wasn't as badly affected as the US or UK for various reasons: less debt (yes), but also less of a banking bubble, a strong manufacturing sector with strong exports (as opposed to UK dependency on the devastated financial sector) - and Merkel introduced a major stimulus package, in contrast to counter-productive Tory austerity policies.

 

Incidentally, I'd run a mile from any commentator on global economics who says "the simple fact is....".

There are very few facts in economics and very few simple explanations - that's why Treasury economic forecasts are nearly always wrong! 

Edited 27 June 2017 by Alf Bentley

[Strokes]

7 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

It's better to go into a global crisis with no debt than with moderate debt (by British standards). I've repeatedly accepted that UK debt made the crash a bit worse than it would otherwise have been - and that Labour were wrong to run a deficit during a boom 2002-2007 (they ran a surplus before then). They should have raised taxes in my view, but that's a political preference (Tories would prefer spending cuts). But public debt was only one factor affecting how different national economies performed in response to the global crash. 

 

These 2 links give a less slanted, less partial analysis:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-australia-ducked-the-crisis/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession_in_Oceania

 

So, aside from low debt, key factors in Australia weathering the storm were: proximity to the massive, rapidly-growing Chinese economy; high levels of trade with China; a mining boom & plentiful natural resources; high immigration; a stimulus in response to the crash; better-managed banks holding a lot less toxic assets.

 

In contrast, the German economy also had low debt and was running a surplus, but still suffered a recession. Because they didn't enjoy some of the Australian advantages and were more exposed to ill winds from the global economy. Germany wasn't as badly affected as the US or UK for various reasons: less debt (yes), but also less of a banking bubble, a strong manufacturing sector with strong exports (as opposed to UK dependency on the devastated financial sector) - and Merkel introduced a major stimulus package, in contrast to counter-productive Tory austerity policies.

 

Incidentally, I'd run a mile from any commentator on global economics who says "the simple fact is....".

There are very few facts in economics and very few simple explanations - that's why Treasury economic forecasts are nearly always wrong! 

You may mock but what he states as a simple fact, is indeed a fact.

 

The global financial crisis didn't hit everywhere like its name suggests and I'm sure there are many other circumstances that surround the why's and why nots but Labour never had a plan for this and were hugely irresponsible. Where the fire started is irrelevant, why it was not contained is. Sound familiar?

[Alf Bentley]

31 minutes ago, Strokes said:

You may mock but what he states as a simple fact, is indeed a fact.

 

The global financial crisis didn't hit everywhere like its name suggests and I'm sure there are many other circumstances that surround the why's and why nots but Labour never had a plan for this and were hugely irresponsible. Where the fire started is irrelevant, why it was not contained is. Sound familiar?

 

It is not a fact. Germany did not have "high government debt and a high budget deficit". It had low debt and a budget surplus. It still suffered a recession (albeit not as bad a one as the UK or US).

 

Did the recession in Germany happen because Merkel was "hugely irresponsible"? No, it was because of the scale of the global crash - for which no plan could be adequate, apart from economic isolationism or the sort of good fortune (combined with good management) that allowed the Aussies to escape.

 

Labour deficit/debt and non-regulation policies exacerbated the impact of the crash (by about 20% is the expert consensus, I think). It would have been a similar scenario if the crash had occurred under Thatcher or Major, both of whom ran deficits most years and favoured minimum regulation.  

 

Edit: Sorry if you thought that I was mocking you. I wasn't. I was just having a laugh at how Treasury economic forecasts are always inaccurate. 

Edited 27 June 2017 by Alf Bentley

[EnderbyFox]

 

[foxy boxing]

3 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

 

they are DUP(ing) all of us!

[Strokes]

43 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

It is not a fact. Germany did not have "high government debt and a high budget deficit". It had low debt and a budget surplus. It still suffered a recession (albeit not as bad a one as the UK or US).

 

Did the recession in Germany happen because Merkel was "hugely irresponsible"? No, it was because of the scale of the global crash - for which no plan could be adequate, apart from economic isolationism or the sort of good fortune (combined with good management) that allowed the Aussies to escape.

 

Labour deficit/debt and non-regulation policies exacerbated the impact of the crash (by about 20% is the expert consensus, I think). It would have been a similar scenario if the crash had occurred under Thatcher or Major, both of whom ran deficits most years and favoured minimum regulation.  

 

Edit: Sorry if you thought that I was mocking you. I wasn't. I was just having a laugh at how Treasury economic forecasts are always inaccurate. 

Low debt is not zero debt so, although it was better for Germany because of this model, it maybe doesn't quite fit the bill  

 

Economic isolation now ther is something that's been mentioned as negative here somewhere  

 

Apologies if i took that the wrong way, I'm not normally that sensitive. Must be that lurch to left during election time  

[Guest Foxin_mad]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

It's better to go into a global crisis with no debt than with moderate debt (by British standards). I've repeatedly accepted that UK debt made the crash a bit worse than it would otherwise have been - and that Labour were wrong to run a deficit during a boom 2002-2007 (they ran a surplus before then). They should have raised taxes in my view, but that's a political preference (Tories would prefer spending cuts). But public debt was only one factor affecting how different national economies performed in response to the global crash. 

 

These 2 links give a less slanted, less partial analysis:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-australia-ducked-the-crisis/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Recession_in_Oceania

 

So, aside from low debt, key factors in Australia weathering the storm were: proximity to the massive, rapidly-growing Chinese economy; high levels of trade with China; a mining boom & plentiful natural resources; high immigration; a stimulus in response to the crash; better-managed banks holding a lot less toxic assets.

 

In contrast, the German economy also had low debt and was running a surplus, but still suffered a recession. Because they didn't enjoy some of the Australian advantages and were more exposed to ill winds from the global economy. Germany wasn't as badly affected as the US or UK for various reasons: less debt (yes), but also less of a banking bubble, a strong manufacturing sector with strong exports (as opposed to UK dependency on the devastated financial sector) - and Merkel introduced a major stimulus package, in contrast to counter-productive Tory austerity policies.

 

Incidentally, I'd run a mile from any commentator on global economics who says "the simple fact is....".

There are very few facts in economics and very few simple explanations - that's why Treasury economic forecasts are nearly always wrong! 

Labour did raise taxes throughout their time in power, raising corporation and business taxes to a level which made the UK an expensive place to operate in 2008, raising them even more at that point would have absolutely destroyed any economy we had left, they consistently ran the fuel duty escalator, and more than doubled council tax during their time in office. They certainly raised taxes well and spent them well too.

 

Germany had a major stimulus package because it could afford to do so as they were running a budget surplus prior to the crash instead of using the money tree, they also haven't sold their primary assets 'gold' for record low prices. Although the Tory policies were classed as 'counter productive' by some peoples opinions, I and others would say spending more money that you don't have is 'counter productive', and in fact when Britain did recover it had growth higher than everyone in the G7 except the US for a number of consecutive quarters (perhaps this is good management and planning for our future?). We have now be hit by Brexit which will cause issues over uncertainty, but I actually believe that structurally our economy is quite strong, we are one of the biggest consumer markets on earth, what we need to do is sell more domestically.

[Guest]

The level of debt has absolutely nothing to do with recession. Tory voters might love conflating the two but they are entirely seperate things. The UK had a huge stimulus package - QE - that was meant to filter into the real economy but didn't as banks simply used it to bolster their positions and it has simply led to stock markets at record levels whilst real economies have been stagnant for almost a decade (whilst overall figures show growth for the uk as a whole only London and the South east have regional gdps greater than in 2007). In the last year of the last labour government there was significant growth but Tory austerity reduced this and stopped the country finding its way out of depression years ago. It is because the Tories have starved the regions of growth than the deficit all you right wingers are so worried about still exists. 

 

I've shown these graphs before but the debt interest levels are pretty average for the uk historically, even now. Debt has increased significantly under this government but only because the financial crisis devastated tax income. The deficit of the brown government was nothing compared to the drop off of revenue and has absolutely no effect on policy differences between the uk and germany. The potential for utilising debt for growth has been undermined by cuts across the board because our government is very right wing by European standards. Tory supporters really need to learn to think for yourself and challenge what the government has been saying.