Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

It's entirely accurate as the Daily Mail confirms (see my last post)

But that gives a figure of a deficit of £130 billion average since 2010, so something is incorrect.

unless they don't count interest payments on the debt in the budget? They stand at around £40 billion a year, that might be the difference?

Posted
5 hours ago, Webbo said:

If it keeps Cvnty McTwatface out of office it's money well spent.

I don't actually know who you're referring to. But I'm glad you approve of liberal government spending.

Posted
1 minute ago, Webbo said:

It's debt they're talking about, not the deficit, while we're running a deficit the debt is bound to go up.

Yeah I know, but £918 billion divide by 7 years is an increase in the deficit. So something is wrong somewhere.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Yeah I know, but £918 billion divide by 7 years is an increase in the deficit. So something is wrong somewhere.

 

6 minutes ago, Strokes said:

But that gives a figure of a deficit of £130 billion average since 2010, so something is incorrect.

unless they don't count interest payments on the debt in the budget? They stand at around £40 billion a year, that might be the difference?

The black line of the graph is deficit. You can see the deficit reduces (angle lessens) as does the size of debt increases (obviously)

fail.jpg

Posted
5 minutes ago, Buce said:

Sooner (I expect) or later there'll be yet another u-turn. Their backbenchers are starting to say the cap needs to go but they couldn't bear to back Corbyn's amendment. Austerity is on the way out.....as will be the Tories as they won't be able to explain what it's all been for. 

Posted

For comparison. Notice how their debt increases hugely during the Bush years - when they were probably at their strongest ever and when the equivalent of right wing Tories were in charge. Strangely, their debt hasn't turned them into Venuezuela:

 

 

us debt.jpg

Posted
1 minute ago, toddybad said:

 

The black line of the graph is deficit. You can see the deficit reduces (angle lessens) as does the size of debt increases (obviously)

fail.jpg

There is no need to patronise me :D 

I'm saying, if the deficit was £110 billion in 2010 (an all time high), and it's been reduced, how can we average £130 billion deficit since? Unless something's are not included.

Posted

Why do fvcking stupid faux leftists keep bringing up the rising debt as a stick to beat the Tories with its so disingenuous it's unbelievable. I'm Labour but I wouldn't bring it up and lower myself to such a fake news argument. People on the left just have to accept that the Labour were in with the banks prior to 2008 and were basically Thatcherites which left us open to the sort of ballooning deficit we have encountered. Either be prepared to bash New Labour or don't bring it up.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, toddybad said:

 

The black line of the graph is deficit. You can see the deficit reduces (angle lessens) as does the size of debt increases (obviously)

fail.jpg

Chill out dude. Our GDP growth will allow us to pay all that back with interest.

Posted
1 minute ago, toddybad said:

For comparison. Notice how their debt increases hugely during the Bush years - when they were probably at their strongest ever and when the equivalent of right wing Tories were in charge. Strangely, their debt hasn't turned them into Venuezuela:

 

 

us debt.jpg

Yeah but Bush had the global financial crash so avoids all criticism remember :thumbup:

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Why do fvcking stupid faux leftists keep bringing up the rising debt as a stick to beat the Tories with its so disingenuous it's unbelievable. I'm Labour but I wouldn't bring it up and lower myself to such a fake news argument. People on the left just have to accept that the Labour were in with the banks prior to 2008 and were basically Thatcherites which left us open to the sort of ballooning deficit we have encountered. Either be prepared to bash New Labour or don't bring it up.

Rising debt ain't the problem. Debt in general isn't the problem. It's our ability to pay that back that debt that is the problem.

 

I agree that both the Tories and Labour once they won didn't do anything to decrease our reliance on the banks. But these seem to be two issues, not one.

 

But I can't agree you shouldn't criticise a government because they're borrowing more without any plans to increase our ability to pay that back. It's a valid complaint of any government, of the Left or the Right.

Edited by Foxxed
  • Like 1
Posted

 

"Tonight, the Conservatives had an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is, by ending cuts to our police and fire service and lifting the public sector pay cap.

“Although government ministers said they had learned the lessons of the general election and were listening to voters, it is clear that nothing has changed.

They had the perfect opportunity to walk the walk, but instead they marched through the lobby to show Tory austerity is business as usual.

While the money is there when the Conservatives need it to keep themselves in office, the rest of the country now face more devastating cuts to our emergency and other vital services.

The Conservatives clearly plan to keep working for a privileged few. Only Labour is ready to form a government that will work for the many."

 

Jeremy Corbyn.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Why do fvcking stupid faux leftists keep bringing up the rising debt as a stick to beat the Tories with its so disingenuous it's unbelievable. I'm Labour but I wouldn't bring it up and lower myself to such a fake news argument. People on the left just have to accept that the Labour were in with the banks prior to 2008 and were basically Thatcherites which left us open to the sort of ballooning deficit we have encountered. Either be prepared to bash New Labour or don't bring it up.

I don't think anybody has done. pretty sure it was DavieG that raised this and I thought he was a Tory (sorry if I'm wrong Davie)

 

2 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Yeah but Bush had the global financial crash so avoids all criticism remember :thumbup:

You're purposely missing my point. 

 

4 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

Chill out dude. Our GDP growth will allow us to pay all that back with interest.

You don't really pay back the national debt. Bonds get reissued (effectively carrying over the debt) but over time the value decreases due to inflation. This is why the £ level of debt goes up over a long period but the % of GDP doesn't have to.

Guest MattP
Posted
2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

"Tonight, the Conservatives had an opportunity to put their money where their mouth is, by ending cuts to our police and fire service and lifting the public sector pay cap.

“Although government ministers said they had learned the lessons of the general election and were listening to voters, it is clear that nothing has changed.

They had the perfect opportunity to walk the walk, but instead they marched through the lobby to show Tory austerity is business as usual.

While the money is there when the Conservatives need it to keep themselves in office, the rest of the country now face more devastating cuts to our emergency and other vital services.

The Conservatives clearly plan to keep working for a privileged few. Only Labour is ready to form a government that will work for the many."

 

Jeremy Corbyn.

If the Tories do this it will be in a budget, not on a Labour amendment. 

 

Surely even Corbyn isn't dopey enough to think they would vote on his amendment days after forming a government? 

 

He's just playing to the idiots again.

Posted
2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

You don't really pay back the national debt. Bonds get reissued (effectively carrying over the debt) but over time the value decreases due to inflation. This is why the £ level of debt goes up over a long period but the % of GDP doesn't have to.

Fair point. But those new issues have to be attractive to gain the name number, or ideally more, buyers. If our GDP or other indicators are shitty (unlike now when they're totally totally tip top) then there are fewer buyers of the re-issues. And this seems to be practically the same as paying it back in purpose if not financial specifics.

Guest MattP
Posted
4 minutes ago, toddybad said:

I don't think anybody has done. pretty sure it was DavieG that raised this and I thought he was a Tory (sorry if I'm wrong Davie)

 

You're purposely missing my point. 

 

You don't really pay back the national debt. Bonds get reissued (effectively carrying over the debt) but over time the value decreases due to inflation. This is why the £ level of debt goes up over a long period but the % of GDP doesn't have to.

Gilt bonds are great aren't they? Hard working taxpayers paying interest to billionaires.

 

Remind me why this is socialist policy again?  Because I can't figure it out.

Posted
1 minute ago, MattP said:

If the Tories do this it will be in a budget, not on a Labour amendment. 

 

Surely even Corbyn isn't dopey enough to think they would vote on his amendment days after forming a government? 

 

He's just playing to the idiots again.

It was testing the water, pretty obvious.

Posted
Just now, MattP said:

Gilt bonds are great aren't they? Hard working taxpayers paying interest to billionaires.

 

Remind me why this is socialist policy again?  Because I can't figure it out.

It's the way the system has worked for hundreds of years. It is often said that our economic system is based on debt-it is. The interest is worth less than what we can buy with the money  -that's why all economies continue to run on debt. Negative deficits (i.e. saving) is not something that is healthy for a country with the worldwide economic model being what it is.  

Posted
6 minutes ago, MattP said:

If the Tories do this it will be in a budget, not on a Labour amendment. 

 

Surely even Corbyn isn't dopey enough to think they would vote on his amendment days after forming a government? 

 

He's just playing to the idiots again.

He's backed the Tories into a corner. He gave them a vote on it - knowing they couldn't vote with him - but if they now u-turn (yet again) it looks bad for them. 

Posted
1 minute ago, toddybad said:

He's backed the Tories into a corner. He gave them a vote on it - knowing they couldn't vote with him - but if they now u-turn (yet again) it looks bad for them. 

Only for people who want it to look bad. Nobody was seriously expecting it to happen.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...