Giant borrowing payback looms
The government is preparing to admit that a huge and unplanned-for rise in government borrowing will have to be paid back in the years to come. The chancellor is expected to announce spending rises and tax cuts to boost the economy in his pre-Budget report on Monday but he'll also make clear how the money he spends will have to be paid back.
Next week, the chancellor has to tell the country how far we've gone into the red. He's preparing to reveal that we'll soon be borrowing over £100bn - that's 11 noughts at the end.
A collapse in the tax the government receives from house sales and from the City of London means we're heading for an annual overdraft worth one twelfth of the country's annual income - a figure that will raise a few eyebrows. It's not been seen since Denis Healey was Chancellor - back in the 1970s - the last time Labour was in power.
I'm told that Alistair Darling wants people who watch his speech to clearly understand how he'll reduce the nation's overdraft without having to read the small print.
The last time a chancellor had to give advance warning of tax rises was under the Tories in 1993. Norman Lamont announced plans to put VAT on gas and electricity bills one year and double it a year later. It caused Labour outrage. Gordon Brown was sitting on the front bench that day.
Today Mr Brown faces opposition taunts that he's planning a tax bombshell. He insists that however high borrowing is already, it's got to go even higher, telling Jeremy Vine on BBC Radio 2 that "You have got to act now so that we avoid a worse problem.
"My father used to say 'a stitch in time saves nine' and I think that's an important message."
The prime minister was also asked the question he's always fudged - whether he regretted his promise to end boom and bust.
"Of course politicians make mistakes, and I've got to be honest that we've made mistakes."
It's Alistair Darling who has the job of undoing some of those mistakes - on Monday he has to be honest about the long term pain we face while promising enough short term gains to stop the country sliding into a slump.
The Treasury's talking about a package of measures that will be "decisive". That means a stimulus - paid for by extra borrowing - of more than 1% of national income GDP - over £15bn to be spent on:
Cancelling planned tax rises - on cars, small business and income tax allowances
Temporary tax cuts - targeted at those most likely to spend the money - the lower paid
And increased spending - on projects that can be started quickly.
It's often said that chancellors' speeches are forgotten a few days after they're delivered. This one looks like proving to be an exception.
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
Sounds like the lower paid will get the benefits and after the next election the middle earners will get the bill.
I will go get my wallet.
Complain about this comment
There comes a time when complete honesty and no spin is the best political policy. The nation now undertands that we are heading for tough times. Gordon Brown's policies may have been partly to blame, but there are many others who can share responsibility either by their actions or their silence.
Everyone knows we have had a really good party. Lots of people have done very well out of the past 11 years. It was like a booze fuelled party - even people who didn't like what was going on protested and then joined in. Now we have got a hangover.
If you want to recover from a hangover tell the truth about how bad it was and get on with a hoped for remedy however unpleasant. People will accept that.
Complain about this comment
A dose of 'honesty' from a politician cannot do any harm plus a little homily thrown in for good measure.
I've got one too, from my mother which seems appropriate for these times:
"When poverty comes through the door, love flies out the window".
Complain about this comment
Well, I suppose it's verging on getting close to honesty, which is a minor miracle for a Labour chancellor. But dear God, is a 'sorry' all we get for a decade of blistering incompetence? If I'd run up debts owed to a bank over a decade, would I just say 'oops' and then ask for MORE?
Election, please. Now.
Complain about this comment
"WE'VE MADE MISTAKES" is hardly apology enough for the hundreds of thousands - millions - who are going to suffer by losing their jobs, self-respect and even their homes. How Brown can even be considered the right person do lead us out of this mess is beyond me. It was Brown who encouraged the massive debt people have taken on, stupidly, and allowed the banks and building societies to drown them in it. Let's have an election now and, hopefully, get rid of him.
Complain about this comment
I did not hear the Vine piece with Brown but I do not suppose that Mr. Brown elaborated on precisely what those mistakes were.
I would guess that the biggest 'mistake' was to allow 'easy credit' on properties.
It would have been so simple, via the FSA, to mandate that mortgages could not be more than say four times earnings, which on its own would have kept house price inflation under control.
Unfortunately, that would have unmasked other problems, like what else do we as a country do that adds genuine value.
So the charade was allowed to continue but these politicians (sans Blair of course) now have to try and sort out the situation that they were partly responsible for causing in the first place.
Some sort of rough justice.
Complain about this comment
self interested, media hogging clowns unfit to govern let alone run for a bus.
over borrow then expect joe public to pay for their unforgivable tactics, there plan to leave the bill for the next government to endure and be criticised over is working well.
i can only assume there wage bill will not be reduced, NO it will go up as per normal for this greedy bunch of ganets hanging around westminster these days.
if this country were a company and government management they would be fired and held fully responsable even leading to criminal charges.
as mp's they think they are immune to the after affects of there actions and sadly they seem to be but in reality they are not and they should be charged with criminal negligence and treason, but will they NO they are above the law and they act like it as we can see with their handeling of the ecconomy.
pushing us into europe via the back door with out a refferendum or even telling us, treasonous behaviour at least.
so mp darling saying sorry is an empty gesture and designed to make them look good to the media, too little too late.
Complain about this comment
"Of course politicians make mistakes, and I've got to be honest that we've made mistakes."
He still can not bring himself to say "I made mistakes".
Complain about this comment
The (present) Government has to stop spending money WE have not got.
Most people (except the rich) are struggling to keep going.
Labour must scrap the elaborate spending plans NOW.
People do need help, not id cards, not more fines, Not more rules and regulations.
Back to basics Labour, do the necessary, no more pet projects.
Complain about this comment
Cluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck CluckCluck Cluck Cluck Cluck Cluck...............................
Do I hear the sound of chickens coming home to roost. Even Nick cannot manage to put a positive spin on what is truly disastrous for every taxpayer.
So much for no more boom and bust, so much for Britain being best placed to weather the storm. The voters will know what to do when the time comes..Labour are a disgrace in terms of economic management and pretty much everything else.
Complain about this comment
It is however difficult to disagree with the short term fiscal boost. Despite its future cost to the tax payer without it, the downturn will be longer and more painfull to the UK economy. However the current Prime minister is the one to blame for having to increase National Debt to levels a "prudent" chancellor would do anything to avoid.
Complain about this comment
Interesting that you compare our economic woes now with the last time Labour was in power.
The budget deficit may get to 8.3% you say?
The last time Labour took us to 7% of GDP the IMF had to bail us out.
Interesting that co-incidentally 1976 also saw a 25% fall in the pound vs the dollar.
And even Jim Callaghan said "We used to think that you could just spend your way out of a recession...I tell you, in all candor, that that option no longer exists."
So, the IMF checklist is there:-
1) Debt gdp heading to >7%? Check
2) A 25% run on the pound vs the dollar? Check
3) Rampant public spending? Check
4) Signs that the market is turning away from buying UK government bonds? Check - this weeks' Gilt auction was only 1.6x covered
It was December 1976 the IMF loan was finally agreed.
I wonder what Santa will bring the UK this December?
Complain about this comment
Its not difficult to disagree with at all. Japan tried it from 1990 onwards and it didnt help them. Lets look at it from an individuals point of view. Youve maxed out on your credit cards, your mortgaged up to the hilt, and someone advises you that the best course of action is to take out another credit card and borrow on that. It might save a bit of pain now, but it'll be nothing to the pain when you cannot get another credit card and you have to pay it all back.
You have to pay back some of the debt to get yourself back in a reasonable state. Borrowing more (eg to have a happy Chrismas) will just make the new year even worse. The answer is STOP BORROWING. STOP SPENDING unless its absolutely necessary. Its painful, but it will be better in the end.
Complain about this comment
We all know what caused the crunch. Read Danial Hannan in the Telegraph.
Easy credit fuelled by low interest rates. It was a political decision. Now the politicians who broke the world expect us to trust in them to fix it.
Thanks but no thanks. Labour out.
Complain about this comment
Oh No he wants to tinker with the details, making things even more over complex - he is obviously in the job creation business for accountants and sundry financial advisers.
As I wrote on the Peston blog - do simple things. If he does complex things he is bound to create unforeseen consequences, particularly in the middle of the year.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2008/11/taxes_to_fall_and_then_rise.html#comment113)
This tendency to micro manage tax has created an impossibly complex tax system, that nobody actually understands and that is full of unforeseen loopholes.
Send out a cheque to everyone as a Christmas box. - I'd start with a monkey.
(A monkey = 500 quid in Estuary - Georgie Porgy Osborne please note. - maybe G.O. and A.D. would prefer an Archer = 2000 quid!!!!, or a bag of sand = 1000 quid to bury his head in.)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Did anyone ask exactly who we are borrowing this money from? If there IS anyone left in the world with true capital to invest, surely they can't be idiotic enough to lend it to Gordon Brown!
Complain about this comment
Is this the BBCs new function for the government:-
The prime minister was also asked the question he's always fudged - whether he regretted his promise to end boom and bust.
"Of course politicians make mistakes, and I've got to be honest that we've made mistakes."
To give them a platform to pretend that they have admitted/apologised so in a week or so say "that is in the past, it was all cleared up (blah) (blah)".
Peston glossed over the governments admission that they misled the public and their own back benchers over the purpose of the money in the 'bank bail out'; now you gloss over browns 'almost' admission of culpability in breaking the most significant claim he made of his political career.
I, for one, am not impressed...
Get brown to admit and confess properly - an/or get mandleson to explain his contact with Oleg regarding eu tariffs.
Complain about this comment
12 Chris Bowie
Absolutely correct.
Which is why it is unforgivable that the media have been giving Brown such a soft ride and allowing him to spin (lie) the country into preparing to splurge more money to cover up the problems he caused as Chancellor.
It is a rare thing that a lone man has destroyed a country largely on his own.
Maybe Gordon can unleash the power-house that is Sarah Brown to beg at the IMF for salvation for us?
Complain about this comment
Oh dear -
I've been referred for pointing out that Gordon has also been telling lies about "we are uniquely placed to weather the recession" (on top of the boom and bust lies).
Gordon is spending billions to cover up his dire track record as Chancellor and calling it a "fiscal stimulus"
Complain about this comment
Not a single politician, not one commentator (including you) or presenter and certainly not a single 'expert' in the news has correctly identified the two interlinked problems the world is facing today:
1. The little financial difficulty: True, it started with sub-prime mortgages, BUT it is far deeper than that. After all the total of sub-prime mortgages is reported as being some $1.5 trillion, whereas Governments have so far pump close to $10 trillion into the banks. If the problem was just sub-prime mortgages, or 'banks not lending to each other', this $10 trillion cash injection would have solved in one go.
No, the problem is 'derivatives'. These dents and bets are worth some $500 trillion. Compare that to the GDP of the whole planet of just $50 trillion and you get some idea why this fantastic burden of debt can NEVER be repaid.
The only solutions are
a) hyperinflation to degrade the whole of that debt (following Zimbabwe)or
b) legal cancellation of all derivative contracts (!!) or
c) collapse of the whole financial system incl just about all banks, and starting all over again.
We need to choose one and go for it. The future is bleak whatever Gordon does, but pumping borrowed money into the economy in the utterly vain hope of recovery is just about the worst possible strategy.
2. The little problem of Energy and Growth.
Next year the world production of crude oil will, for the first time in history, decline for geological, not political or economic, reasons. Peak Gas will follow some 10 years later.
2008 is the end of the Era of Growth (as growth is predicated on the availability of cheap energy) and the start of the Era of Decline.
No matter what investment is made in oil or gas fields, the total production from 2009 onwards will decline every single year by perhaps 4%, thus our energy sources will halve every 20 years or so. This has already happened in 60 oil producing countries around the world, incl USA (1972) and UK(1999) and now, in 2009, global production will begin to decline.
The 1930s depression was bad enough, but this decline will be on a massively larger scale. To start with, it will be at least 40 years long. 40 years will take us to about 25% of current energy usage, which is what we can expect from all renewable sources combined. So at that stage, provided Governments have been wise enough to have invested massively in renewable energy, renewables may be able to take over from fossil fuels and perhaps stabilise the world economy.
So, the budget should
a) embrace the Green New Deal (£50 billion per year invested in renewables)
b) forget about tax cuts or other increases in current spending
c) choose a strategy for the self inflicted financial crisis - and follow through
Complain about this comment
Well done the BBC - I'm watching some "detailed" explanation of the level of debt and borrowing at the moment on TV (Newsnight??).
Debt is being portrayed as (until recently) lower than every other country and an "independent" expert was found who also backed up the BBC / Labour claim that debt has been at about 38% - until the banking crisis turned up.
The BBC did let on that the poor will get the tax credit and middle earners will be paying for the credit. The left wing think that is "ok" - which is probably why it got past the post Jonathan Ross / Russell Brand editorial commitee.
Complain about this comment
Sick Sick Sick!!
Sick at Brown showboating on the world stage after the mess he caused by spending not saving in the good times.
Sick that with all this overspending and borrowing when I have not run up massive debts I will still have to pay.
Sick that Labour have brought us back to the 1970's (and I am old enough to remember that - the whole family sitting round a parafin stove in one room to keep warm. Doing my homework by candlelight because of the power cuts. Walking past piles of rubbish in the streets because of strikes. Wondering if we would go to school next week as they were running out of coal for heating and might send us home. Reading how the IMF had to bail us out, though I was too young to understand. Not seeing my father for weeks on end because he left before I got up and didn't get in til I was in bed because he had to work so hard to keep the company he worked for from bankruptcy)
I knew it would be bad when Bliar got in in '97. I now know Brown is even worse!
Not even in my worst nightmares did I imagine HOW bad it could get!!!
They have mortgaged our future. Now they are going to tell how much for.
As I said, Sick!!!
Complain about this comment
It would be amusing to see all the Tories coming on here saying "Labour out!" - if it wasn't so pathetic.
We are in the mess we are in because a supposedly left wing Labour government behaved like an extremist free market right wing government. Ditching regulations, loosening credit, kow-towing completely to the financial sector - the whole shooting match.
Now apparently the solution is to get in a Tory government which is, one assumes, more right wing than the disastrous right wing government it is going to replace.
Actually, it is worse than that. The intellectual titans in the Tory Party apparently think that the best policies at the height of the worst crisis capitalism has faced for seventy years are to pretend that there isn't a crisis at all, and worry about taxes going up in a few years time. This is delusionality and denial of a high order indeed.
The economy is in danger of completely collapsing for a decade. Extreme measures are required because we are in an extremely bad situation. The extreme capitalist experiment has been an utter catastrophe. If governments had not stepped in to nationalise most of the financial sector, capitalism would ACTUALLY have collapsed (it still might). Left wing measures have just rescued capitalism (maybe).
But you must be all be right. Capitalism has just proved no more successful than communism. Bring back the Tories!
Complain about this comment
Oh dear - a PM referring to 'we' when saying 'made mistakes'. The last PM to refer to themselves as 'we', the way the Queen uses the royal 'we' meaning I, was Thatcher, near the end of tenure at Number 10.
Complain about this comment
Santa Darling is giving you a present, he's picked your pocket to pay for it , guess what, taking it after Christmas, o' by the way you have to pay the return cost as well.
As an old boss of mine told me "son you can make a mistake, we all can but make the same mistake again then there's the door" £100,000,000, 000. that's a lot of mistakes that are all the same.
To blame it all on America compounds the mistakes.
I've had enough going to close my eyes and dream that I could dance as well as John Sargent......Goodnight
Complain about this comment
This is just the end of the beginning. All that is left now are the tears.
We are going to have mass unemployment in the spring - topping 3 million if it has not already as the stats are crooked - we have been in recession for 3 months at least but had 0% growth shown - er...really?? - and we are now seeing the end game for Brown - which is going to be complete and utter destruction of the economy.
I hope that when the tories get in they make it illegal to harm the economy to such a degree, and retrospectively prosecute Brown and Darling and their cronies
Complain about this comment
8 - peterfergie
course he won't, he never will!
Although the actual inclusion of the word "mistake" is quite impressive, in reality, all Brown's said there is what everybody on the face of the planet knows: he was talking absolute rubbish when he said he'd abolished boom and bust. He's not given us any more detail than that.
Complain about this comment
Darling is not a high charisma politician. But I have been increasingly impressed by the way he has calmly analysed and thought out some of the problems he has picked up. Not that long ago he was chastised for calling this the worst position we have seen for 60 years - and while I am still not sure why he referred to 1948 in particular, his viewpoint looks less exaggerated than it once did. And he has in his own quiet way come up with answers and solutions, and in general seems to be threading his way more than competently through troubled waters.
The knee jerk response is just to go "ya, boo" and witter on about Brown, Labour and ignore the way this country has built its economy over the last 30 years. As the facts are that are debt to income ratios now are actually better than average. Our problem is that our economy based on housing and financial services is not well placed to ride a global storm, and the result of this will be that future debt to income measure will soon become badly skewed, and we will be dependent on the performance of other nations to eventually see this out. Both major parties have responsibility for the shape of this economy, as it has taken far more than 10 years to get to where it is, and set off down the route to lead us here in the 1980's. It will take more than 10 years to get it back.
But I will await Darling's announcement with interest, as so far he has in his considered way come up with answers and decisions, and has seemed to be sincere and honest. The only other person in the House who has come up with more and been ahead of the situation has been Vince Cable.
But if your interests are cheap party politics, rather than who is best to sort this - then of course, look to the Dave and George show - so aptly displayed in a Times cartoon this week with the Mickey and Minnie Mouse ears on for their latest non-announcement that really did once again nothing for the country.
Complain about this comment
Let us say that as a result of "stimulus" I have an extra £300 in my pocket. As a result, I decide to replace my TV (as far as I am aware this is pretty much what Brown and Darling would like me to do). So
The TV is made in Korea (by Koreans, of course)
It was transported here on a Singaporean owned and crewed ship
It was delivered to the shop by a Polish company
The shop itself is ultimately German-owned
The shop assistant is Czech and sends all his spare money to his family in Prague
Even the electricity it uses is generated from Russian gas sold into the UK by a French middle-man
[Frankly, even if the TV blows up, the water to put out the resulting fire is delivered by a French-owned company].
So, my question is, how does this "stimulus" help the British economy?
Complain about this comment
I assume those wittering on here about prosecuting "Brown and his cronies" will be fully in favour of them sharing the eventual police cells with the entire US Republican Administration and the senior officers of all the world's financial institutions?
Brown is actually now rescuing financial capitalism by completely reversing the right wing nonsense that somehow destroyed his brain for a decade. We are heading for a complete (downwards) re-evaluation of the role of free markets, particularly in the financial sector, and a complete (upwards) re-evaluation of the vital role of governments in the economy.
Or did I just miss something? I thought I just saw the private banking sector being completely rescued by governments. And now we are about to see the same thing happen in the US to the private automotive sector (there will be more of this worldwide to come).
As in the 1930s, laissez faire capitalism has failed, and is being rescued by left wing government led interventionism. Brown was indeed wrong to follow a far right US administration in such idiotic right wing policies for so long. But please help me see how this is now a recommendation for a right wing government in the UK? Is it that Tories are somehow supposed to be better at running heavily state managed mixed economies than socialists? Because that's what we are going to be doing for the forseeable future.
Complain about this comment
I have an idea for a revenue neutral way to ease our economic woes.
With all the redundancies around isn't it time our 'political industry' took its share of the pain?
At the moment it seems our MEP's cost over £100 million, the UK parliament £161 million the Scottish parliament £63million. On the basis that these figures are typical if we think of the other institutions like regional assemblies etc then the annual cost to the tax payer might exceed several £billion.
If we made 25% of our politicians redundant across the 'piece' we could achieve annual and incrimental cost savings (pension liabilitieis, travel expenses etc).
These savings could be shared amonst our 11.5 million pensioners who would either pay their fuel and food bills, spend it on their children/grandchildren or spend it in our shops, cafes and garden centres where many of our lowest paid people work.
This is an absolute win win, our politicians could truthfully say they share our pain. Some of our pensioners would not die from cold or malnutrition this winter.
It has no extra admin cost as the systems are all in place. It would help to keep the lowest paid in work and boost demand. With 80% of every pound spent ending up back in the Treasury even the government could be a winner!
Maybe not enough to stave off recession but it sure would cheer all us taxpayers up who foot the bill for this wasteful and stupid government.
Complain about this comment
jrperry you don't get it! The situation we are in is SO calamitous, that we now need a massive coordinated global fiscal stimulus. Some economies will then no doubt do better than others, depending on their fundamental competitiveness.
If the French, Koreans, Poles etc. have more money as a result of our stimulus, than hopefully they will use some of that to buy British goods. And they in turn need to stimulate their economies (like the Chinese are doing) to enable them to buy more goods from the rest of the world (including us). In any case, many of the services you talk about are actually provided IN the UK.
The alternative is that we all simply go down the plughole together, with nobody buying anything from anyone.
I assume that's current Tory policy. We will all be destitute and unemployed in a few years' time, having destroyed most of what remains of our industrial base - but, hey, at least the middle classes won't pay any more taxes! (Mainly because they will be out of work.)
We are waiting now for a global Roosevelt to rescue capitalism again. It may not be Gordon Brown (it hopefully might be Barack Obama). The idea that it might be David Cameron is as laughable as that it might have been John McCain. You are the idiots who got us into this mess.
Complain about this comment
As all industry sectors are facing redundancies isn't it time our 'political industry' did the same.
How about 25% of all politicians across the 'piece'. That's HoC, HoL Mep'S, Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly,Metropolitian councils, elected Mayors, unelected quangos like regional assemblies.
The 100's of millions we save could be shared amongst our 11.5 million pensioners.
They are the most likely group to spend either to keep warm/eat, shopping where many of our lowest paid work or helping children/grandchilgren.
It would have the added bonus of being revenue neutral and rerquire no extra admin expense as systems are in place.
It might not be enough to stave off recession but it would make hard pressed tax payers feel better who have to foot the bill for the wasteful and stupid political elite.
Complain about this comment
Dear All,
I am 44yrs, divorced and earn about 22k per year. My children are looked after by my ex-wife (I pay child maint) and I pay rent for my house.
I do not expect anything from AD next week except my tax will increase and my bills will become bigger.
I hope I will be proved wrong, but I ain't holding my breath!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
"My father used to say 'a stitch in time saves nine' and I think that's an important message." says Gordon the Great.
Could this be Gordons 'I used to go to watch Jackie Milburn when I was on the terraces moment' I don't know about anybody else but Gordon's quote is something my mother might have said, but my father, wow maybe we know why Gordon is the way he is. He's pulling the old son of the Manse bit again isn't he, who is advising the man.
If this is Gordon being sorry then you know where I'm going on this, the war in Afghanistan, the war and occupation of Iraq, get them out, bring them home, stop the killing, and accept that you were wrong, that you have blood on your hands Gordon.
As for me, tell you what my father might have said 'Don't mess with me son, just don't mess with me, now go and do as your mother tells you'. Only the mess word might be a bit higher on the not to be used scale.
This is all getting beyond parody, please put us out of our misery. As Darling might say, we are all so 'pissed off' with you Gordon.
You have so messed up, now you think by fessing up that makes it alright does it, do you really think so, well make my day punk, do you feel lucky, do you feel lucky? Lock and load!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
when will anybody say to Gordon you are not the chancellor any more, you are the Prime Minister. Let Darling do his job, you do yours, when Alistair gets it right stop trying to take the praise, just imagine that you were still chancellor and Blair was still Prime Minister. If you did something right and Blair had said that it was him, what would you have said, come on remember what a sulky boy you were Gordon, or have you no memory.
This is what is annoying about Gordon, he's wants to be ackowledged as being our saviour, well he isn't. Mind you I do know somebody who keeps saying I told you so, I know who reads these comments etc... oh that's right it's me, I'm becoming an Aspidistra, and I pick my nose aaagh, they've got me. Is this how it all ends?
Complain about this comment
#22
jonathan_cook
......blogging whilst watching Newsnight.
You sad, sad person - you really should get out more.
Bill
Complain about this comment
The Tories are going to do nothing?
Actually they are trying to slow down the juggernaught, before it rolls over the cliff, by applying a brake.
With Labour it is full steam ahead - and let's press the accelerator on monday.
Complain about this comment
NICK - It appears that one Council has shown Flash Gordon the way he should have ran the economy over the last decade.
The Treasurer for that Council stated:
How refreshing, stashing money away for a rainy day. They have estimated that their rainy day reserve should weather them through 3 - 4 years downturn without cutting vital services.
By the way that Council is NuLabour controlled. It is little wonder that Flash Gordon has not hailed this as a guiding light, there again he cant he would only spotlight the shoddy way he has run the economy during his spell in Downing Street!
The Council in question is Glasgow. Pity the Numpties at the top of the NuLabour party did not follow their thrifty actions.
NICK ? Will you point this out next time you have a heart to heart with your mate Flash!
Complain about this comment
Novoludo.... "New Game" - interesting!
Actually, I think you are the one who doesn't get it.
We have two things in hand. The first is a world banking crisis. As much as can be done about that, at least with injections of money, has been done already.
Then we have a rather more local recession, which has been predicted for a little while now, was accelerated by the banking crisis, but would have happened anyway, a direct consequence of UK government economic policy over ten years or so.
We have a Prime Minister who is trying to spin a story that the recession is part of the world crisis. It isn't - in its severest sense, it's local. That's why every economist worth his salt is showing its impact as going to be far greater here than anywhere else.
We also have Prime Minister who for the saving of his reputation, and maybe his job too, is bigging up the local crisis and trying to portray himself as a man of action, with a series of moves that we will still be paying for in twenty years time.
So back to my point from my message 30. The most damaged economy is our own. We have no real money to fix it with and no need or obligation to follow your argument and fix anyone else's economy - for a start, we need the fix more than practically anyone else does. Why are we doing something, "fiscal stimulus", on a scale far grander tha we can afford, in the name of fixing problems with our economy, when the real effect will be to leak almost 100% of the ultimate benefit out of the country - I repeat, to other countries that don't need our money as much as we do!
Complain about this comment
I listened to the Jeremy Vine interview and was shocked by what I heard. It seemed as if those who phoned in had been hand-picked to make sure Brown was seen in a positive light. It was almost a party political broadcast.
What happened to those who had a concern? He said he'd personally intervene to help them!
How lucky they were, but what about the tens of thousands of people in this country who couldn't get on the phone? - Their future has been wrecked by this government's financial policies, some of those people have been prudent and made sure they didn't go overdrawn or borrow too much.
We're one of those families, and believe me we're hard working, but we're probably the wrong sort of "hard working".
We've made sure we didn't go into debt. We did this by NOT taking foreign holidays, by NOT buying new cars, by NOT buying expensive household items. NOT buying designer clothes for our children and by NOT overborrowing.
We really were the mugs weren't we, because yet again we're the the ones who will be hammered by higher prices, higher taxes and will get no support from central government that says they'll bail out those who were careless.
It simple isn't fair and it isn't reasonable either.
Complain about this comment
Well as John Major once said - If it aint hurting - It aint working. Here we go again!
Nick, I am not as sure about the small print as you are! From experience alone, I would not trust these Numpties an inch.
One consolation is that Teflon Tony is edging ever so closer to the driving seat. My one wish is that the four architects of the NuLabour Project are all huddled together in the driving seat when the NuLabour train crashes. Yep Flash, Mandy, Ali and Teflon Tony. It will almost be worth the pain.
Complain about this comment
I was alway told not to throw good money after bad. This seems to be the governments proposed solution to the financial crisis that their mismangement has brought upon us.
Actually it seems more like using gasoline to put out a fire.
Complain about this comment
#31 novoludo
Or did I just miss something?
Yep?..The last 11 years!
Complain about this comment
Well jr - what are you proposing? That we starve our way out of recession? What on earth does "we can't afford it" mean in our current condition? The patient will be well and truly dead if we don't try something to keep it alive.
It is a truly wondrous thing to watch conservatives blaming Labour for the collapse of capitalism, and then to claim that the way out of the crisis is the 1930s minus Keynes and Roosevelt. Truly wondrous!
What you are missing is that those of us on the Left fully agree with you that Brown and Blair messed things up utterly (on the economy just as in Iraq). But by following your polices, not ours. You should be down on your knees thanking us for rescuing you from your follies. And agreeing that the world has had quite enough lunatic right wing governments for a couple of decades.
Complain about this comment
And by the way jr, I really wish it were true that we had a little matter of a world banking crisis that we had already done what can be done for it. Your complacency must be very comforting to you. (Citibank is on the point of collapse and you think we should sit idly by being good capitalists. Good idea!)
We are in the early stages of a fully fledged global economic slump, the worst for decades, which started in the financial sector as a result of the absurd laissez faire policies followed there (by our right wing Labour government too of course). But the real economy is now being savaged too. Major companies in the automotive, mining, and shipping sectors, to name just a few, are under severe pressure (I know, I work with many of them). They too cannot possibly survive in anything like their current form unless there is a major global stimulus. And indeed probably unless governments take a direct hand in some of them, as the US are about to do in their automotive sector.
You may be right that the UK economy is in worse shape than most. I agree. With the US it followed the most nutty extreme laissez faire policies. How do people like you explain that the stronger economies now are such as France, Spain and the Scandinavians - precisely the ones that didn't follow the more absurd anglo-american excesses?
I know it suits your political prejudices to claim that our plight in the UK is mainly the fault of local Labour policies rather than the more comprehensive and interlinked failures of a certain extreme form of global caplitalism. But even you must see that this is manifest nonsense. This is a global system on the point of systemic collapse, and you know it.
Complain about this comment
46
"What you are missing is that those of us on the Left fully agree with you that Brown and Blair messed things up utterly (on the economy just as in Iraq). But by following your polices, not ours".
Why didn't you follow your own "polices" (sic)
Complain about this comment
Roll_On_2010: do you seriously think that Brown and Blair caused the collapse of global capitalism by following left of centre economic policies which now need to be rectified by a conservative government?
I agree: the right wing Blair/Brown government has mainly been a disaster. That's why I don't want an even more right wing Cameron/Osbourne government.
Unfortunately I think it is quite possible that, as in the 1930s, this capitalist collapse will usher in neofascist regimes in a number of countries. But I am exceedingly hopeful of course that, following the election of Obama in the US, we will this time weather out the storm by moving to sane and realistic left of centre social democratic governments instead. Fortunately Gordon Brown is now at last returning to his political roots and abandoning the Blairite Thatcherism which got us all into this mess.
Complain about this comment
#23 qwertyWalrus
Sick Sick Sick!!
Naw, you don?t mean the Winter of discontent and the preceding recession that put Thatcher in power. The NuLabour apologists on here have airbrushed those events from history.
At least the Tories will not have a big election spend come 2010. With the predicted 3 Mill unemployed they just need to dig out the Poster they used in 1979.
Complain about this comment
Novoludo
To be brief - it's way past my bedtime.
I don't think we should be doing generalised fiscal stimulus because it is inefficient, too blunt a weapon, too little of the total amount of money that will be spent will stay in our own economy.
I think the government should hold off, keep what is left of the available taxpayers' money in hand, but watch the economy very carefully and intervene in a fire-fighting fashion where genuine problems become clear. It's a hard-nosed approach, it effectively acknowledges that there are some businesses in this country that we only need in the context of employing people, but which are fundamentally unproductive (just look at the number of supermarkets we have, for example - far far more thanwe really need). It also would be unpopular, and I can imagine some thin and shrill voices on the radio opposing the policy. But it uses the pounds far more wisely, and in particular doesn't leak 90% of the money overseas.
I know you were exaggerating to make a point, so I will too, but in terms of feeding people, 100bn of fiscal stimulus only buys the same as 5bn of food stamps.
And who said I was a Tory? (But I am worried that behind all that is open and apparent, Brown is experimenting with buying an election victory.)
Complain about this comment
48 idealisticynic: Why didn't we follow our 'own' left of centre of policies? Beats me!
If we and some other countries had, we wouldn't now have a meltdown in the middle east and a meltdown in the global economy - both calamities fully supported by conservatives in the UK, and originated by conservatives in the US.
So hopefully we will now learn from our terrible mistakes. That most people are now doing so is why Obama just got elected, and Cameron / Osbourne are slipping in the polls.
Complain about this comment
#23 qwertyWalrus
Sick Sick Sick!!
Naw, you don?t mean the Winter of discontent and the preceding recession that put Thatcher in power. The NuLabour apologists on here have airbrushed those events from history.
At least the Tories will not have a big election spend come 2010. With the predicted 3 Mill unemployed they just need to dig out the Poster they used in 1979.
Complain about this comment
jr - fair enough. There is a very reasonable debate to be had about how far governments should be rescuing the system by broad scale stimulus, and how much by targeted intervention. If we are all social democrats now, then I would be happy to debate precisely which social democratic tools we should use.
At least then we can all agree that right of centre parties are going to be intellectually bankrupt for at least a couple of decades (as indeed they were from about 1930 to the late 1970s), since their policies caused this catastrophe.
Indeed Brown (who obviously I have little time for) is trying to spin a story - "it's not my fault gov, it's the global recession" - for political advantage. From my position, it IS his fault - because he is one of the arch ideologues who has created the global recession. Not primarily because he is caused a parochial UK recession. His crimes are much more heinous. But he does seem to be seeing the light a bit now. (Thank God a true Tory like Blair was not in charge when this all hit. We would have been really stuffed.)
Cameron is going back to the old Tory playbook of trying to win the next election by scaring the middle classes about taxes. This is utterly cynical and irresponsible, since obviously tax levels in 2-3 years time are hardly are most pressing problem right now.
Worrying about taking on debt now because of future taxes is like worrying about taking life-saving medication in fear of the later side-effects.
Complain about this comment
Nick, you?re the expert, I think.
At what point next year would you say we be able to see if this jolly has worked! When will we know when the Brown stuff has hit the fan?
I don?t love the Tories, just hate NuLabour worse. Been an active member of the Labour movement since my mid teens, I am now 60. Walked away from NuLabour in 2003, when they invaded Iraq.
Blair, Brown, Mandy and Ali flushed my 40 years of belief down the toilet with the NuLabour project. As far as I am concerned the Labour party died with John Smith.
Does it matter who is in power, they are all the same. Greedy beggars.
Complain about this comment
Left of centre - you are jesting ?aren?t you.
Complain about this comment
Roll-On: Well, I can agree with you there about NuLabour! But don't lose the faith!
What we can see clearly now is that NuLabour was really just 'Thatcherism with a human face' - except as you say in Iraq, where it was Thatcherism with a Bushite face.
The capitalist crisis has changed everything. People will never again believe all the free market tosh forced down our throats for three decades. They will never again believe that the captains of banks and industry can be trusted. They are revolted by the excesses and inequalities of the years of right wing dominance. And they will see that they had to turn to left of centre governments and policies (state intervention, bluntly) when extreme capitalism failed again.
The shape of the new left of centre political consensus is of course not yet clear. But it is not Thatcherite NuLabour. And it is certainly not anything coming out of utterly bankrupt institutions such as the US Republicans and the UK Conservatives. They are toast. Obama really is now our main hope. Although I fear that he will be captured by the capitalist ideologues too.
Complain about this comment
49# novoludo
By the way, one of the first people Teflon Tony invited to 10 Downing Street, after the 1997 election, was Thatcher.
Rather prophetic that Thatcher once said - Tony wont let us down.
Complain about this comment
I all this extra borrowing and spending only gives a minor blip to the economy and we then slip back deeper, is there a blan B, borrow more?
Complain about this comment
Yawn.
Last time Labour was out for 18 years.
1997 onwards.
DEBT DEBT DEBT WASTE WASTE WASTE.
BORROW BORROW BORROW.
30 years out would suit me or longer. .
Complain about this comment
A few labour supporters in the blog here.
Some quite funny comments too.
Let's get one thing straight, Nu Labour is responsible for allowing the market to explode the way it did.
House prices outstripping income, people having to take greater risk in borrowing to get onto the housing ladder.
Massive PFI plans and borrowing to fund government projects, forcing taxes to record levels.
Record numbers claiming benefit, massive cost of an illegal war in Iraq.
Destroying the pensions industry, selling off the UK's gold which is where we should be investing money now.
Even taxing the low paid by aboloishing the 10p band.
Now, from all that, I can't see a liberal or conservative politician anywhere.
This problem lies firmly wiith Blair/Brown.
They were in the hot seats for 10 years and they allowed the economy to expand too quickly, similar to a business that grows to quickly, it will fail.
So to all you Labour supporters out there, the same old line, blame the tories won't wash anymore.
It's time for a change of Government.
Complain about this comment
I feel slightly sympathetic with Darling. Whoever took over from Brown was going to face a mess in the National Accounts.
But remember the old children's favorite?
Mr Darling was always trying to discourage his children from flying off with Peter Pan to Never-Never Land.
This Mr Darling is suggesting that Never-Never Land is the only place to go - at least for a few years.
Peter Pan Brown seemed to believe that borrowing was fine, as the debt would never grow up - at least not in his political lifetime...
That's why HE allowed a weak, overstretched organisation (FSA, which he created) to avoid getting a grip on financial institutions. And, if the banks were allowed to get away with murder, that provided a smokescreen for the profligacy of his Treasury antics.
Complain about this comment
Alexandercurzon: Seems like you have completely misunderstood wht has just happened.
Free market capitalism is currently collapsing on a global scale. Its financial sector has had to be comprehensively rescued by governments. The real economy is now in an an utterly precarious state, with major automotive companies and others faced by potential bankruptcy if governments don't intervene there too. Small businesses across the western world are going to the wall on a mass scale on a daily basis.
In short: this is not some little parochial event in the UK that we can conveniently blame Gordon Brown for! And the right wing parties that I assume you support are the ones who created this catastrophe (including the right wing Blair government that slavishly followed the US Republican line in all free market things). Your political and economic philosophy has utterly failed, and you are the ones who are facing the political wilderness.
Complain about this comment
There have been many comments about "right wing policies" having failed - whether a Tory or Labour administration has been in power.
"Policy" per se does nothing.
It's the manner in which it is followed and executed that matters.
Brown unravelled the ragulatory framework surroundng financial institutions - and submitted the FSA as the replacement.
The FSA was supposed to oversee the capital held by banks. They obviously accepted the pretend money (derivatives invented on Wall Street - but also here - based on doubtful income from sub-prime loans).
If they didn't understand the real "value" of this junk, they could have refused to recognise it as real "capital".
That would have put an enormous brake on the sale / purchase of junk. The US banks would have had a huge problem - but they may also have slowed down their "creativity" and focused on real banking...
That's the beef about Brown.
Crazy "loan-to-income" and "loan-to-asset-value" ratios gave an enormous push to the escalation in house prices. That could have been controlled, reducing the huge level of debts.
That's the beef about Brown.
The UK has been a trading nation for a thousand years. Therefore always impacted by fluctuations in global economies.
But the local debt levels are entirely down to the way in which "policy" is executed within this nation.
The massive growth in economic activity in China, India, etc, has been down to "right wing policies" applied within different social environments.
It ain't what you say - it's what you do. And it ain't what you do - it's the way that you do it...
Complain about this comment
#63
Why can't we blame Gordon Brown?
As Chancellor and now as Premier he has failed to enforce regulatory compliance.
He has failed to ensure that the FSA remained true to its statutory objectives.
He has presided over a consumer-led boom. Anyone with any knowledge of history knows that bust follows boom, but in spite of that we had current account deficits as he spent more than he received in tax and asset sales, ie he assumed that the boom would never end.
The current crisis points to a failure of each political party in each of the jurisdictions affected by the financial crisis. All leaders enjoyed the love and adoration that the boom showered on them.
The Iron Chancellor. The Best Chancellor Ever. Etc Etc
If there was a failure of regulation, it must have been a political failure, as regulators failed to either understand or have the political backing to address the problems being stored up and then unleashed.
In the UK, Gordon's to blame. A free market is fine as long as there is regulatory compliance (I am actually a mixed-economy person). Light touch regulation is fine (such as the comply-or-explain approach and Code of Corporate Governance and the FSA's Principles) - as long as there is strong enforcement.
As an aside, another aspect of regulatory control in the UK is senior management responsibility. All directors and officers in regulated entities need to be fit and proper to retain their Approved Person's status with the FSA. Despite the crisis, I haven't heard of any enforcement action against those who made the decisions that led to the crisis in our banks. Is that Bush and Thatcher's fault too?
The Romans built our roads. Are they responsible for road deaths?
Complain about this comment
Vote Labour - bankrupting the country since 1975.
All that pain in the 1980s to build the semblance of a hard working, productive economy undoing decades of 'graceful decline'.
It took 11 years for a man with class angst and a chip on his shoulder to destroy it.
Explain how a fiscal stimulus works when those that have real income to shop, spend, etc, etc, know they are getting NONE of the benefit but all of the pain?
Mark my words, this will not work.
It will only retrench those that have the means and delay their spending further.
What I'd like to know is why only the Tories are holding them to account?
1976 and the IMF loan was the culmination of truly awful socialist policies.
The sense of humiliation and the outrage were palpable.
Never again, it was vowed, in '79 Labour were voted out for a generation.
Well, despite all the promises, all the assurances and probably all their efforts - they have done it again.
Labour CANNOT be trusted with the economy, they just cannot help themselves.
There is no compassion in spending so much money that you end up putting millions out of work.
We are about to surpass Sunny Jim's government with a current account deficit & record borrowing.
The public sector had better feel some of the pain too as we can see precious little for our taxes, time to reform them properly.
Personally, I'm beyond angry, I feel shame that this great country can elect a pack of shysters, spin merchants and half-baked incompetents as the very best of us.
Aided and abetted by trade unions that have contributed to square root of nothing to the reform and modernisation that our public services need.
A political force unscrutinised by its friends in public broadcasting, a force that plays the opposition personalities whilst stealing their policies.
Fooled by easy money, have this, pay later.
Oh, how we are paying now.
They say first among equals.
Yeah, if you say so.
Complain about this comment
And following this rescue package, with associated short term gains for all , the Government will take the lead in opinion polls and call a general election. It's SO obvious! June?
Complain about this comment
Of course we should blame Gordon Brown! The interesting questions though are: what should we blame him FOR, and what are the implications in terms of what policies and governments we need now?
What we should blame the Blair/Brown regime for is continuing the insane low regulation, high laissez faire, extreme capitalism inaugurated by Thatcher and Reagan in the late 1970s.
I agree with all the criticisms put on here about the failure of the FSA, proper compliance etc. etc.. Of course. We gave all that up in the ideological belief that markets were essentially self-regulating and that governments should leave them to do their own thing.
So yes indeed - we absolutely should fundamentally run our economies differently from the way they have been run for the last thirty years. It's resulted in catastrophe. (Those who have any doubts about the global nature and extent of the catastrophe just pick up the Financial Times any day of the week and see the screaming headlines.)
Let us indeed blame Brown. But why on earth would we suppose that the solution would be to elect the very same free market ideologues that got us into this mess in the first place? The US electorate has just seen the light and elected the left of centre Obama to make a clean break with the catastrophic economic policies of the last thirty years. We need to do the same. The tragedy is that New Labour was basically a continuation in economic terms of Thatcherism, and even the LibDems under Clegg finally and farcically drank the neoliberal kool aid.
We better hope Obama and his team can lead us all out of the wilderness in the same way that Reagan lead us into to it. Otherways we are really in trouble.
Complain about this comment
Government has stared to do the right thing now, hope there are tax cuts to increase the manufacturing base and it will spend on building the infrastructure.
I do agree it mess the country in the past due to increased expense on benefits and uncontrolled immigration as well as destroying the manufacturing base.
I will always support borrowing to spend on building the country but not to pay benefits.
Complain about this comment
where is the money coming from?...the printing press....
what happens when it does not work.........borrow (print) more money.
result?........hyperinflation.
borrowing money is what caused this mess.....low interest rates will not work....japan had 0% for years and the US has low rates!who exactly does a rate cut helps...not the 50% of people on fixed rate mortgages, not the millions of savers, not the small businessman as the banks refuse to pass on the cut.
just how does a rate cut "stimulate" the economy? just how do tax cuts stimulate an economy....most people are in deep debt so the money will go to reducing debt not buying more gadgets (how many flat screen televisions does a family need?)
savers have suffered too long from below real inflation returns, put the rates up and savers will start to spend the interest....now that will stimulate the economy and stabilise house prices at sensible levels...
Complain about this comment
Nick,
there is serious news breaking on the Today programme this morning about the death of a British, note British, citizen being killed as a result of a Drone attack by Americans in Pakistan.
Excuse me but there is no war against Pakistan, they are a free and democratic sovereign nation state. So, what ever happened to the rule of law. At least the President of Iraq went through a trial before the Americans handed him over to the Iraqis to be executed. Now we have the obscenity of a remotely controlled Drone, Reaper or Predator, dropping bombs and killing a British citizen. So, Brown what do you think of this, and before you answer remember the killing of Mr de Menezes by British armed with guns firing dum-dum bullets.
This is unacceptable but how complicit are we in this, have we given America permission to go around killing British citizens on the basis that it is part of the war on terror. Remember that Rumsfeld signed a classified order in the spring 2004 at the direction of President Bush. This order gave authority for American Special Forces (and I think British as well) to conduct operations in countries not at war with the United States.
Now, whilst he is sorting out the economy and planning for an election then this is the sort of thing our Prime Minister ought to be asked questions about. There is a stain on Britain which is beginning to smell. If you want another example remember Harry in Afghanistan with his computer screen showing the attack on some freedom fighters.
I suppose that Brown may well explain away the death of a British citizen on the basis that 'a sttch in time saves nine' another way of saying that the ends justifies the means.
Complain about this comment
#68.
It's clear that you cannot remember the 1970s and the socialist policies that bankrupted the country and left the dead unburied.
Useless public services more eager to strike than work.
Left-wing governments do not get it right. Capitalism is not a modern invention, it has existed for over 500 years, the Anglo-Saxon trading model, over 1300 years.
In short, capitalism works.
Socialism, 50 years. Even then, minds like Orwell struggled to define it.
Socialism... mmmm... that doesn't work.
The most successful economies in the world are low tax, small government, light regulation.
That's regulation that works, not the kind of regulation Brown created.
Brown is no capitalist, he's a former TV man and academic. He's never ran a business or part of one and neither has he employed people and it shows.
Blaming Thatcher and Reagan, both of whom left office almost 20 years doesn't wash.
Brown and Blair did this, they tinkered and messed with things they didn't understand. They inherited an economy in excellent shape and they had the benefit of a once in a lifetime economic virtuous circle.
They not only blew the money and more, they wrecked the economy.
We are all paying the price for it.
Well, the client state isn't, they are showered with more of Labour's largesse.
If you are moderately successful and aspire and strive, have a reasonable job, have a mortgage and run a car - you are Labour's cannon fodder. These are the people that will pay for it.
These tax breaks are a bribe. End. Of.
Complain about this comment
Brown says: "Of course politicians make mistakes, and I've got to be honest that we've made mistakes."
(Possibly the first time he's ever said anything I can totally agree with).
To make a mistake is human.
To make the same mistake twice is foolish.
To repeat and compound these mistakes over 11 years is utter stupidity - or worse.
Let's hope that the British electorate don't repeat the mistake of believing this shambles of a government ever again.
Complain about this comment
Confronted with the "collapse of capitalism" would any of the main political parties act differently? An attempt to protect the lowest paid in this current sharp economic downturn is the least a government can do. It strikes me as being unhelpful to take a party political line over this as understanding of the crisis and news of ways in which countries are affected changes daily.
I like PaulS comments above @ 21. A nice bit of radical thinking. The only problem is, when there are gaping holes in things, when you close them up or close them down, whichever terminology you prefer, the hole will appear again elsewhere.
The message is, for those who have worked productively all our lives, is, that what we have already done is not enough and we need to put our noses back to the grindstone and work even harder!
It's the story of my life.
Complain about this comment
Has anyone stopped to think that the tax rises needed to pay for this latest exercise may well have to be paid for by ourselves under the leadership of a Conservative Government. It gives David Cameron and George Osborne (if he is still in place) absolutely no room to put their own solutions into place without major surgery on spending and that won't be popular with the voters. Keep Brown and Darling in place I say so that they can clean up their own mess and fail spectacularly. Right now the two of them appear to be in a no lose situation. When the stuff hits the fan they'll be history for many years to come.
Complain about this comment
If the Gov't had followed Ken Clarke's tax ands spending plans from 1997 onwards beyond the first two prudent years what would be the outcome now nearly 12 years later?
I am not an economist but the answer is a a massive SURPLUS thus no need for borrowing! Just mega tax cuts...all funded!
Why has no commentator or journalist done this comparison? Is it because it would be a stark and complelling reason for a Conservative Government...yet again?
Anyway if the Gov't is going to borrow for the population to start spending I have an easy answer that will allow Darling to make a 5 minute speech.
He's going to borrow £15B which would give EVERY voter in this country £500. So why not send out a £500 Gov't bond (voucher) that can only be redeemed in the UK on anything...houses, cars, clothes, even food and energy bills and any stage over the next 6 months.
And tell everyone it is their patriotic duty to spend it!
No doubt Crash Gordon will try to micro manage his national credit card funded giveaways at Labour core vote. His polisy will be totally political in a desperate attempt to shore up his vote and his faces being the PM with the shortest term in the last 50 years and facing the biggest defeat.
Anyway, Darling will present Brown's final economic act on this country's road to bankrupcy on Monday afternoon..........
no doubt it will be this country's longest suicide note in history...........
Complain about this comment
In the past when ministers made mistakes they resigned.
At the present time all Gordon Brown has fessed up to is a mistake in announcing "no return to boom and bust". He has always had a reputation for not accepting responsibility for anything.
His arrogance over the last 20 years both as Shadow Chancellor and the Chancellor has destroyed any economic prospects for this country.
The man is a disgrace, he should so the honourable thing and resign from parliament without a pension. He won't of course, but just doing what he has always done, blame someone else.
Complain about this comment
NovoLudo POST 63
Misunderstood?? HA HA
This mess is as bad as the seeds that set the Crisis in Germany in the 20's/30's.
The financial Crisis is down to the Government,the FSA,the MPC & B OF E.
LACK OF FISCAL PRUDENCE .
Complain about this comment
Novoludo POST63
You assume incorrectly
I am NOT right wing
I loath all our current Political Parties
Including the BNP.
Regarding BLAME
ONCE AGAIN
Downing St ,The FSA,The MPC,& The B of E.
THAT IS WHERE THE BUCK STOPS.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
we are all on the road to serfdom. I know that some people are saying let labour win the next election so that they will then be exposed as the chancers which they are. They have no policy they have no philosophy other than to stay in power, they want to be the leaders only they aren't. Labour must not win the next election, if they do then abandon hope, seriously!
The only solution to this 'downturn' is to let it go, let asset values collapse, let them go until they find a new lower level, they will, trust me.
It is only in the recent past that we have actually repaid the final tranches of the debt accumulated from America in WWII. Now we want to et into even more debt, but now with some very unpleasant people, you know who I mean. Well I don't want to be in debt to these people, why, because my father used to give me good advice and this one is more appropriate than a stitch in time, it's 'he who pays the piper calls the tune', think about it, China a dn Saudi Arabia, you seriously could not make it up.
Complain about this comment
So Gordon's dad used to tell him 'a stitch in time saves nine'. The essence of the saying is that an early repair avoids a bigger repair later.
But it is the borrowing and spending that has caused the damage, so increasing this is just increasing the damage. There is no sense in which more debt will repair the underlying problem, so it's clear Gordon didn't understand what his dad was telling him.
So expect a big repair bill in the future, possibly so big it will never be paid.
#74 newtactic:
It seems from the latest retail figures that people are continuing to spend quite freely even without a stimulus. Now that there is much less stigma attached to defaulting, this may be the approach that many will take, so we are looking at a collapse of the social structure more than a "collapse of capitalism".
Complain about this comment
Novoludo I take it you dont have a NAME?
Perhaps you would like to work for me then you could deal with the nearly 20 Million pounds worth of bad debt we have had YTD .
You could perhaps explain to my Chinese workers that its possible that we might have to reduce the workforce in 2010.
You could also go into various Bankrupt customers and take our stock back.
###########################
I feel you Misunderstand whats going on?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
may I suggest that Gordon go to his local library and get out a couple of films which may help him on his journey, 'Tunes of Glory' and 'Fame is the Spur' go on Gordon you may learn something useful.
Oh, but not as useful as reading my comments on Nicks Glorious Blog.
Complain about this comment
If only Gordon's dad had also told him "look after your pennies and the pounds will look after themselves".
It would also be nice if Gordon's dad had told him "that you can't shut a door after the horse has bolted".
Afterall the time for a "stitch in time to save nine" was a long time ago.
Gordon is about to "throw good money after bad".
Complain about this comment
DEBT REPAYMENT
We only repaid the last payment for the Second World War a few years ago.
Guess GORDYS legacy may take LONGER.
##########################
"NO MORE BOOM & BUST" HA HA
REAL SICK JOKE,WHATEVER.
Complain about this comment
60 alexandrecurzon
Last time Labour was out for 18 years.
And you really thought that the people were doing well at that time do you. maybe you were chum but millions of others weren't,at least we have had ten years out of eleven of damn good living now we have to pay a little back thats Ok, but lets not let the Tories take us back to the wilderness that was the eighties and nineties
Complain about this comment
POST 86
18 years etc
What we need is proportional
representation.
Regretfully the Bill this time will take
decades to pay.
Complain about this comment
A translation of Brown's boring ramble
Is "the only way out is to gamble",
He wants us to forget
That we're drowning in debt,
(That's tough even for Alistair Campbell)
Complain about this comment
Brown's performance on Jeremy Vine show was truly sickening. The "public" who did get through had clearly been hand picked (was Mandy on the telephone's?). I was too late to phone , say I was 100% Labour...then get on the phone and ask him is he going to decrease quango budgets by 50%....this would immediately save £30billion and then he can really give tax cuts. All our private companies are cutting budgets but NOT ONE WORD for this government do do ANYTHING with their bloated budgets. The Guardian pages are STILL full of the typical non jobs. Cameron it is time for you to go for Brown....
Complain about this comment
23 qwertywalrus
#Not seeing my father for weeks on end because he left before I got up and didn't get in til I was in bed because he had to work so hard to keep the company he worked for from bankruptcy)
With all the hours he was working how do you equate that with
#the whole family sitting round a parafin stove in one room to keep warm,
I lived through those times and if you say that you had that experiencs then you must have been under the control of Hatton a left wing extremist that Kinnock through out on his ear as soon as he was made leader of the Labour party.
It wouldn't have mattered how many hours your father had put in, in the eighties thats if he was lucky enough to be employed, the company he worked for would almost certainly have gone to the wall.
On top of that you had interest rates of 15% and inflation running at it highest level ever, compare that with now if you like or compare it with the last eleven years. but then you wont, it's a waste of time talking to you tories, with your blind hate!.
Complain about this comment
Here's a useful suggestion from a British Colony on income tax; the Falkland Islands:
Income Tax
For individuals, the first £12,000 of income is tax free the next £12,000 charged at 20% and any amount thereafter charged at 25%. The complex system of individual deductions and allowances previously in place has been removed.
I also understand that the first £12,00 is transferable between husband and wife.
That would slim down the cost of revenue collection in the UK and get people off "welfare breeding" and back into work.
Complain about this comment
It's incredibly arrogant to say you know that the government's measures are or aren't going to work, in unpredictable times like these.
Sorry if I'm oversimplifying here but it seems like the choice is between a shorter but more painful recession (conservative), or a longer, less painful recession (labour). Maybe older, upper middle class daily mail readers have the luxury of deciding which recession they'd prefer, but there are plenty of hard working people and small businesses who don't. They need help now.
Everyone on here who blames new labour and says the answer is conservative should remember this is the most conservative labour govt in history and all they did was carry on most of the economic policies in place since 1979. At least govt investment & the introduction of the minimum wage has made this easier for some people. What we need is a govt that treats capitalism as a system, not a religion.
Complain about this comment
Post 92. Bedjockey.
You say.........
Everyone on here who blames new labour and says the answer is conservative should remember this is the most conservative labour govt in history and all they did was carry on most of the economic policies in place since 1979.
That is simply not true!
The point is that is Labour HAD followed those policies of SOUND MONEY and genuine balance budgets over the cycle then we would have a MASSIVE surplus by now...12 years later.
It's the fact the Brown did NOT carry on with Ken Clarke's prudent fiscal policies and went on an 11 year debt fuelled spending binge which has got us into this mess.
Everyone in the country will finally realise that if we had had 12 years of Conservative Gov't there would be something in the cupboard right now to help us out most definately.
Bedjockey you have missed the point. Think again.........
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Brown and Darling have given up all pretence of sanity; they are in a hole and are still digging.
He is going to borrow £100bn from us to give us tax cuts, money which doesn't really exist at all. He's obviously learnt new tricks about buying debt from his banker friends.
The show goes on, nothing has changed.
Parliament down the tubes, property down the tubes, banking down the tubes, insurance down the tubes, manufacturing down the tubes, retailing down the tubes; not a lot left is there?
Get rid of the whole lot of them now, before it is too late and we go down the tubes.
Complain about this comment
Ah Nooooo! #10 has stolen my clucks.
I'll try another:- Keynes must be turning in his grave at the misinterpretation of his recession beating economic strategy.
That feels better.
Complain about this comment
the 70s vs the 80s and early 90s arguement
extreme Socialism has failed and now extreme capitalism seems to have failed. So possibly Niether are the answer. Sorry to be boring but the answer is probably somewhere inbetween, A mixed economy. Its 2008 and people are refering back to pre 1978. Thats 30 years. A bit like being in 1980 and refering back to 1950! This Labour government is nothing like the 1970s and has learned the lesson of 18 years out of power. But maybe it has swung too far to the right and needs to pull back a bit. Conservatives have no answers. They just want power and they hope to win it with PR and punch and judy politics they think its their turn but have nothing to offer.
Complain about this comment
Mr Brown is the only politician who can save the world from an awful recession. He should be made a Life emperor with A Campbell and P Mendelson assisting him to make sure the probity and honesty of the state are upheld at all times . Is that better Mr regulator ?
Complain about this comment
Mr Nick, do you agree with your BBC colleague Mr Peston who clearly blames Mr Greenspan for the World problem but Mr Brown for the more severe impact in the UK, saying Mr Brown doted on Mr Greenspan and was his devoted follower, etc. etc almost slave-like.
Also, now you have revealed the pre-budget, thankfully saving the rest of us from having to sit through the Darling drone, could you please round it off by revealing exactly what the tax rises will be, who will they hit and at what level, and when, they will start?
Or is that a truth too far?
Or is it in the small print that we do not need to read?
Complain about this comment
No wonder Gordon the Golem wants to restructure the IMF. He wants it to be his streetwalker for when Britain has to go cap in hand to the IMF in a few years time.
But isn't it a shame that Gordon the Golem didn't think about his father's "stitch in time" attitude somewhat earlier, such as when he was stoking the over-heating economy?
Complain about this comment
#90 grandantidote
You seem to be doing battle single-handedly at the moment, so I just wanted to reassure you that you are not the only blogger who remembers things the way they ACTUALLY were in the 60's 70's 80's and 90's.
If experience teaches us anything, it is that the replacement of the present government by the Tories will make little difference - except for making the rich richer just that little bit sooner.
The expectation of some working people that putting the Tories in power will improve their lot beggars belief.
Sadly, so many comments on these blogs do rather confirm that Thatcher brought about one basic shift in British society in the 80's. Evidently, many people really do now believe that behaving with total selfishness is OK.
Keep on fighting the good fight grandantidote.
Complain about this comment
85 alexandercurzon
Cant say I agree with you on 87 but its a reasoned argument which is unusual on here, to get back to 85,
#We only repaid the last payment for the Second World War a few years ago.
Although we were very grateful for the help we got from the Americans before they finally realised that this war concerned them too.
I am afraid that I am a little cynical,Britain had the most powerful navy in the world at the outbreak of the war but we lost many ships in our efforts to bring food and supplies into the country, but after almost begging the yanks, they eventually decided to help us out by selling us on credit all the old ships that they were about to scrap.
Although very gratefull we were also doing them a favour by buying these ships, as active ships, when in fact they were destined for the scrapyard, a much better prospect to add to the basket.
Also many old planes and other equipment to be fair to them when they could see that things were starting to get out of hand they did start to send us decent modern equipment. all to add to the basket.
When the Japs attacked Pearl Harbour it put the fear of God into them, they then started sending aid in abundence especially to Russia as by this time they the Russians had discovered that Hitler wasn't such a great guy after all.
Many British sailors and merchant mariners were lost supplying Russia with arms, after this the rest is history but it left the British navy decimated and leaving the American fleet the worlds most powerful.
We now had to pay all this money back and although being on our knees ourselves we were paying back what we had borrowed, this was then taken accross the English channel and given to the Germans the very people that we had been fighting for four years.
Then in 45 they were giving the money from Russia and ourselves to the Japanese, the consequence of that was that both these countries recovered much faster than any of the allies and both were leading the world with ther savior the USA.
After a few years of this the Russians gave the yanks the two finger salute and said enoughs enough, not us Brits with our stiff upper lip and our sense of [in my opinion misplaced ] honour right up to as you say not long ago cleared.
what will happen in the future who knows but we face a different sort of problem now perhaps in a way almost as serious and if we have to borrow now and pay back later then to suvive thats what we have to do.
As we unfortunately had to do back then but perhaps with a better deal now.
Complain about this comment
Do you know ther real problem with making the public sector more efficient?
The problem is not that it is difficult to find savings; rather the opposite, it is easy to find savings.
It is so easy, that if it were taken seriously the size/cost of the public sector would be more than decimated.
Once a few simple principals of efficiency were adopted, applied accross the entire public sector huge number of public servants would be redundant.
Unemployment would shoot up - and while those in the (wealth generating) private sector would be far better off with lower taxes (funding basic benefits, rather than gold plated employment contracts), it would take time for the ex-public servants to find useful work to do which would be very damaging to the economy in the short term.
I hope a new government will be brave enough to tackle this head on, admit how badly the private sector have been milked for so long, and free this country of the burden of a massively overweight public sector.
Complain about this comment
#93 Northern Thatcherite
Don't think I don't take your point about prudence, cos I do. I'm no great lover of this govt I just defend them when I can because I think they're the lesser evil.
The point I was trying to make was that through the period labour have governed we've had an essentially Thatcherite economy ie. denationalised, deregulated and ridiculously heavily dependant on the services sector. Perhaps if labour had reversed some of this our country would have more to offer the world during these difficult times. Instead for 5 days a week, everyone sits behind a desk worrying how they're going to pay their bills and worrying they're going to lose their jobs.
I don't remember the 70s and I'm not trying to say they were great, I'm just saying that Mrs T. was a hardliner and new labour are at least more likely to recognise that and do something about it than the Tories are
Complain about this comment
Nick (and many posters on here talking about high historic levels of debt) could do with reading this article.
Real journalism.
Complain about this comment
novoludo wrote:
We are waiting now for a global Roosevelt to rescue capitalism again. It may not be Gordon Brown (it hopefully might be Barack Obama). The idea that it might be David Cameron is as laughable as that it might have been John McCain. You are the idiots who got us into this mess.
You do realise that Gordon Brown and New Labour have been the party in Government for the last 11 and a half years.
None of this mess is the result of David Cameron, and if you look at the history of the Sub Prime problem in the US you will see the roots of it in the Clinton administration.
So if as Gordon Brown seems to suggest the whole global economic problems are down to the US sub-prime market then we should thank the democrats!
Complain about this comment
idealisticynic wrote:
46
"What you are missing is that those of us on the Left fully agree with you that Brown and Blair messed things up utterly (on the economy just as in Iraq). But by following your polices, not ours".
Why didn't you follow your own "polices" (sic)
They didn't follow their own policies because people remember how badly they failed in the 70s.
The worst thing possible would be to implement socialist policies in the current climate.
Socialist policies are expensive and trying to implement them when the economy is shrinking is crazy.
Complain about this comment
Well,I don't expect much of an apology from Darling and Brown for getting us into this mess.I expect more waffle liberally mixed with tripe.
btw..Where's Charlie Boy Hardwidge when you need his words of wisdom?
Complain about this comment
#90 grandantidote:
"On top of that you had interest rates of 15% and inflation running at it highest level ever, compare that with now if you like or compare it with the last eleven years. but then you wont, it's a waste of time talking to you tories, with your blind hate!."
Check this:
http://www.watsonwyatt.com/europe/pubs/statistics/render2.asp?ID=1
Looks like inflation (RPI) was higher in 1975.
I remember our union accepting an annual pay deal of 25%, only we didn't get it because the Labour government brought in the pay freeze.
Complain about this comment
105. At 12:38pm on 22 Nov 2008, balhamu wrote:
Nick (and many posters on here talking about high historic levels of debt) could do with reading this article.
Did you read this bit:-
2. In 1993, during the last recession, the Conservative government borrowed about £51bn. This year, Labour is expected to borrow about £64bn. (A record!)
And then Nicks blog:-
He's preparing to reveal that we'll soon be borrowing over £100bn
And all this excludes northern rock, which has serious problems with its 'granite' vehicle.
Even if you thought 51bn to 64bn (approx 20%) was OK, what about the actual 51bn to 100bn ?
The private sector have slashed admin costs (particularly) with the rise of technology. Public sector hasn't.
Government spending (of our tax money), should be going down where is our 'IT dividend'? instead it has gone up, and is about to leap massively yet again.
Complain about this comment
grandantidote wrote:
60 alexandrecurzon
Last time Labour was out for 18 years.
And you really thought that the people were doing well at that time do you. maybe you were chum but millions of others weren't,at least we have had ten years out of eleven of damn good living now we have to pay a little back thats Ok, but lets not let the Tories take us back to the wilderness that was the eighties and nineties
Which 10 were the good years?
My salary has only increased by about 4% since 2000 (due to the company I worked for going bust and having to start at a new company on a reduced salary).
When you compare the increases in my salary to the increases in my tax bill you will see that year on year I am worse off - now you might consider being worse off "damn good living" however I don't.
I admit that there are some people who have done very well out of New Labour, the financial sector certainly did well out of it! As did council workers and others who get a proportion of their wage from the government purse.
As I was not working under a tory government (because I was at school/University) I can't speak from my own experience. However, I can look at my grandparents who were able to buy their council house, and my father who was in full time employment for the entire period (although he lost his job under New Labour)
I was also lucky enough to go to University under the Conservative government and I got a grant, my younger sister got no grant and had to pay fees (again under a Labour government).
You say we got 10 good years, however I am really not seeing it!
Complain about this comment
Post 104 Bedjockey
I can see what you are saying and if I am honest I think the basic problem that needs to be solved is that our economy is unbalanced with it's income dependent on the non-manufacuring sector.
Thatcher swept out or privatised the old nationalised subsidy dependent wealth burning pre-war industries and replaced with some new industries backed by inward investment from Japan and the US.
It is now time to do this again for the next generation. This country can ride the back of the "green revolution" and lead the way in products and innovation.
However, this will take massive investment and incentives from the Gov't and to do this we must follow a Thatcherite approach to Gov't finances by reducing the burden on the private wealth creating sector by "fixing Gov't expenditure at todays levels thus forcing through efficiencies and cost reductions together with the abandonment of "nice" Gov't pet projects and quangos.
We need a new framework for future income generation which doesn't over rely on the finance sector and we need to get Gov't off the back of UK plc both in terms of regulation and taxation.
Set the wealth creators free.............that's the best way to increase out spending power as a nation in the long-term.............not more and more and more borrowing................which is false wealth!
Complain about this comment
balhamu wrote:
Nick (and many posters on here talking about high historic levels of debt) could do with reading this article.
Real journalism.
I agree it was a very well written argument, however I will quote the overall conclusion:
So how do they compare overall? Arguably, Labour's plight is worse because it is starting a recession from a higher net debt position than the start of the recession in the early 1990s. Borrowing also seems to be beginning to rise faster.
But things are not yet remotely as bad as they have been on many previous occasions. Claims the country is in a better debt position than it was in 1997 are true, but less relevant than the comparison with the start of the last recession in the early 90s, by which measure today's debt is higher.
The problem is that after 16 years of solid growth the percentage of the public debt is much higher then it was before the start of the last recession. We are entering this recession in a worse condition then we entered the last one and the borrowing is rising faster.
So while we only have record debt in actual numbers of pounds owed we also have "higher" percentage debt then at the start of the last recession.
A recession means that GDP shrinks so debt as a percentage of GDP will increase even without borrowing. However, the government have committed themselves to increased borrowing.
It is very likely (and probably almost certain) that if New Labour lose the election in 2010 that the debt levels as a percentage of GDP will be higher then they inherited.
Complain about this comment
The saddest thing in all of this is the complete and utter lack of any credible alternatives being put forward by the other main political parties.
In particular, the Tories should be ashamed of themselves for so badly failing people like me: the so-called "coping class".
We've been on the butt end of Gordon Brown's disastrous economic policies for a decade or more: paying for them on the way down, and now being fingered to pay for them on the way out. All the while, the political party that should have been opposing Brown's madness and sticking up for the "coping class" - the Tories - have been bending over backwards to sell themselves as Labour-Lite. For me, it's been 10 years of anger and frustration.
Now that Labour's been found out and the Tories shown to have wasted 10 years trying to squeeze into Labour's clothes, our democracy has been undermined and a whole section of society - the dynamo of our wealth creating capability - has been utterly betrayed. All of this was predictable.
If Cameron and his superficial political dolts think they're getting my vote in the next election, they're going to have to work a damned site harder and smarter. The only guy who's talked any sense recently as we've watched the world disappear up its own global financial exhaust pipe has been Vince Cable.
If the Tories don't come up with something soon - and I mean something credible - then I'll wager that the Brown Terror will be with us for another decade. Go figure that, my fellow members of the "coping class". It seems the Tories couldn't care less.
Now let's watch the markets give us their opinion of Labour's economic competence: it couldn't be much worse than the Tories', that's for sure.
Complain about this comment
What will be the verdict on New Labour in 2010 after 13 years of governance?
1. Between 1997 and 2010 an increase in the unemployed of up to 1.5 million.
2. Mega Government debt at eye-watering levels never seen before.
3. Mega enterprise destroying tax rises in the pipeline like we've never seen before.
4. An unbalanced economy.
5. A mega bill for Blair's illegal wars.
6. A broken society riddled with crime and poverty.
7. Diminished respect on the world stage.
Effectively we will be the "sick man of Europe" once again.
And that is why Brown will be well and truly booted out. And that is why the Conservatives have to stop being so timid and embrace the solutions proffered by Margaret Thatcher once again 30 years after Labour messed up last time.
This is deja vue all over again.
Students of politics should not be thumbing through the dusty books of Keynes for answers but just need to log on to: www.margaretthatcher.org
I rest my case.
Complain about this comment
It's truly heart breaking to witness the utter reliance of the British economy on debt fuelled shopping and services. Instead of recognising the inherant weakness in the economy - and trying to stimulate manufacturing and other industries - Labour have simply encouraged us to borrow ever more to fuel a decade long shopping spree.
Now, because there is nothing else for the economy to fall back on, all the talk is of encouraging the banks to start lending again so that we can continue to spend. And so the cycle continues...
Complain about this comment
111 mark elliot
#My salary has only increased by about 4% since 2000 (due to the company I worked for going bust and having to start at a new company on a reduced salary).
And of course thats Labours fault, disregarding our present economical position many companies go bankrupt every year thats business I'm afraid. if you had to find a job that paid less then that was down to your initative not Labour.
#When you compare the increases in my salary to the increases in my tax bill you will see that year on year I am worse off - now you might consider being worse off "damn good living" however I don't.
increases in wages over the last ten years have been based on the cost of living index, inflation since inflation has been very low over that period then so has wage increases, there's been a massive amount of job possibilities over the last ten years so why didn't you take the advice of one of the Tory heroes and"get on your bike"
#I can look at my grandparents who were able to buy their council house, and my father who was in full time employment for the entire period (although he lost his job under New Labour)
Buying council houses is a whole other story but I might add that was not why they were built, obviously many people were in full time employment otherwise the country would have ground to a holt, but many many more were not, including young university students like yourself who were chasing jobs on the bins and road sweeping
I don't suppose your Daddy told you of them, some applying for seventy or eighty jobs and not even getting to the interview stage. so your dad lost his job under Labour, at least he had many other jobs to go to not like the Tory wilderness years.
I was also lucky enough to go to University under the Conservative government and I got a grant, my younger sister got no grant and had to pay fees (again under a Labour government).
So you reckon that all you that go to college should get a free ride off the rest of us do you? if your lucky enough to go to college then you dont have to pay the fees until you start to earn after you leave college and then you have to be in a high paid job even then only a small amount each month with no interest until you have paid back what you have in effect borrowed.
The colleges and universities were the people who were demanding more money and there scheme was adopted by Labour, your sisters pretty lucky I would say and good luck to her. have you noticed that the Tories are now in favour and have no plans to change any aspect of it.
#You say we got 10 good years, however I am really not seeing it!
Take your blinkers off.
Complain about this comment
Up towards the top of the list of posts, I asked a question, which seems to me to be fundamental to the philosophy of a fiscal stimulus. It hasn't been answered yet, and the more closely adherent to the government line seem to be rather skating around it in the posts today. So I will ask again, in the hope that someone has a good answer.
Let us say that as a result of "stimulus" I have an extra £300 in my pocket. As a result, I decide to replace my TV (as far as I am aware this is pretty much what Brown and Darling would like me to do). So
The TV is made in Korea (by Koreans, of course)
It was transported here on a Singaporean owned and crewed ship
It was delivered to the shop by a Polish company
The shop itself is ultimately German-owned
The shop assistant is Czech and sends all his spare money to his family in Prague
Even the electricity it uses is generated from Russian gas sold into the UK by a French middle-man
[Frankly, even if the TV blows up, the water to put out the resulting fire is delivered by a French-owned company].
So, my question is, how does this "stimulus" help the British economy?
Complain about this comment
why worry over having to pay higher taxes for a while as long as the government continues to gather there high pay rates along with perks who are we to dissagree with them.
they know what they are doing and were elected to do whats best for those that elected them, we shouldnt moan just keep on going with the continuos great work the government are doing.
we should paise them and re elect them to continue there good work.
i am booking my neu labour full frontal labotomy for tomorow.
Complain about this comment
Balhamu 105, thanks for that excellent article. It certainly puts some of the scare headlines in the media into perspective. Excellent common sense via "The Gateway to the South".
Grandantidote... I share your experiences of the 60s, 70s,80s and 90s and I too have watched the rich tending to get richer under certain administrations.
I will also say I am inclined to be more content under an administration which attempts a fairer distribution of tax revenues and provides a safety net for the casualties and dispossessed when things get tough.
111 Mark_W_ Elliot...we all judge governments by our personal experiences, which is why I have said and say again. If you believe a certain party represents your views, join it and subscribe to it. Meet and discuss things with local members.
If you feel strongly about things, I don't think just using your vote at an election is enough. You are in a much stronger position to lobby for change as a member one of the political parties, as you get to vote for your party representatives.
Complain about this comment
101;
You're right when you say that The Conservatives if they get in won't be able to make any difference to the plight of the poor or anyone else for that matter but that's not really their their fault is it unless they somehow have had a hand up Gordon Brown's back? . The rich will always be able to get by whoever is in power. In the grand scheme of things they're rather irrelevant. After give away Monday there will be no turning back and we'll all be paying for years to come whichever party we support or whichever party is in power. The die has been cast!
Complain about this comment
Eleven years ago, we rescued Britain from the parlous state to which socialism had brought it. I remind the House that, under socialism, this country had come to such a pass that [ Nicholas Henderson ] one of our most able and distinguished ambassadors felt compelled to write in a famous dispatch, a copy of which found its way into The Economist, the following words:
"We talk of ourselves without shame as being one of the less prosperous countries of Europe. The prognosis for the foreseeable future"
,
he said in 1979, was "discouraging".
Conservative government has changed all that. Once again, Britain stands tall in the councils of Europe and of the world, and our policies have brought unparalleled prosperity to our citizens at home.
Yes, our companies have the freedom and talent to succeed, and the will to compete. And compete we must. Our competitors will not be taking a break. There must be no hankering after soft options and no going back to the disastrous economic policies of Labour Governments. No amount of distance lends enchantment to the lean years of Labour, which gave us the lowest growth rate in Europe, the highest strike record and, for the average family, virtually no increase in take-home pay. Labour's policies are a vote of no confidence in the ability of British people to manage their own affairs. We have that confidence. Confidence in freedom and confidence in enterprise. That is what divides Conservatives from socialists.
Our stewardship of the public finances has been better than that of any Government for nearly 50 years. It has enabled us to repay debt and cut taxes. The resulting success of the private sector has generated the wealth and revenues which pay for better social services?to double the amount being spent to help the disabled, to give extra help to war widows, and vastly to increase spending on the national health service. More than 1 million more patients are being treated each year and there are 8,000 more doctors and 53,000 more nurses to treat them.
Back to the future...................
Complain about this comment
#121 sicilian
You're right when you say that The Conservatives if they get in won't be able to make any difference to the plight of the poor or anyone else for that matter but that's not really their their fault is it unless they somehow have had a hand up Gordon Brown's back? . The rich will always be able to get by whoever is in power. In the grand scheme of things they're rather irrelevant. After give away Monday there will be no turning back and we'll all be paying for years to come whichever party we support or whichever party is in power. The die has been cast!
......we (the taxpayers) will be paying for it for years to come because there is never a recession in Whitehall!
Complain about this comment
I have been prudent and as a result do not have £1 of debt. I did as Gordon Brown wanted and lived within my earnings. I have savings and investments the return on which is now lower. I listended to the Jeremy Vine Show and heard Gordon`s piece. His "apology" was so mumbled it was intelligible. His excuse when pressed about allowing credit to get so out of control in this country - ie 125% mortgages UK having 1/2 of credit card debt in the EU (at least we are good at doing something!) was to say it was the peoples` choice. Was an absolute bozo! Here we have an Ex Chancellor who could not foresee the negative effect of abolishing the 10p tax band would have on the low paid - how on earth is he to be trusted in getting the country out of this mess? He was not the sole architect of this financial crisis but he certainly was a major player. I look with interest to the Chancellor`s piece on Monday, which Gordon was trying to portray on the JV Show as Alistair`s speech alone and that he had nothing to do with it. What a load of tosh. Honesty, I don`t think Gordon Brown even knows the meaning of it. As with all Labour budgets you have had to read the very fine print to understand what the true consequences are. I don`t expect anything different on Monday. There will definitely be something that will take everyone by suprise, there always is - but don`t be fooled. The truth will out in the coming weeks when Father Xmas, aka Alistair and his little helper Gordon won`t be delivering the presents they really promised. A sackful of pretty boxes with very little in them.
Complain about this comment
Well I have looked at the last two amjor recessions: 1929 and 1972.
This looks more like 1929.
And what effect will we have by spending more?
Nothing.. or very little.
Most economists have not sudied recessions...
Lesson number 1 to 22: Governments make recessions.
Time stops recessions.
Period.
The Government can spend as it likes Nothing will stop GDP contracting 3 to 6% next year..
Goldman Scahs forecast US GDP to contract 5% this Quarter. Not a mistake .
This quarter.
And we expect to stop UK recession spending £15 billion..
Well as we are NOT spending £15billion - as taxes not implemented are NOT a stimulus - absolutely no chance.
And any decent commentator would say so.
Complain about this comment
#70: "Borrowing money is what caused this mess". Governments, including the UK Govt, borrowing money have caused the global collapse of capitalism? Are you really really sure about that? You don't think it might have had something to do with a completely unsustainable speculative bubble caused by unregulated banks cheer led by Mr Greenspan et al (and, yes, including Gordon Brown)? I think you might find that it is recent Government borrowing that is rescuing the system, not destroying it. Or were you in favour of letting most of the world's banking system go to the wall? Are you now in favour of letting the entire US automotive sector go to the wall?
#72: "The most successful economies in the world are the low tax, small government, lightly regulated..." That would be why the UK and the US economies, the most dedicated followers of extreme anglo-saxon capitalism, are the worst hit by the current catastrophe, right? And that must explain why more heavily regulated social democratic countries like Canada, Spain and the Nordics are looking a lot healthier? And why France now has some of the world's strongest banks whilst Citibank is imploding?
#78: "The financial crisis is down to the Government, the FSA, the MPC and the Bank of England". Right! They caused the US sub-prime crisis, the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the Icelandic debacle, and the imminent collapse of Citibank? Well, since they are so powerful, at least they should single-handedly be able to save the world economy. (Hint: you might find that the current world economic crisis extends rather further than the Isles of Man and Wight.)
#99: On Greenspan, Brown and Clinton - yes indeed, they all share the blame for the current debacle. All followed the ludicrously optimistic and unrealistic free market fantasies (inaugurated by Reagan and Thatcher and continued most destructively by Bush) which have got us into this mess. Hopefully now Obama and, perhaps, the a longer delusional Brown, will now get us out of it. I certainly pin more hopes on Obama!
#97: "Extreme socialism has failed and now extreme capitalism seems to have failed". Absolutely spot on! That is why the Conservatives in the UK and the Republicans in the US are now intellectually and politically dead. They inaugurated this 'revolution that has failed', and it completely dominates all their thinking. They will now need a couple of decades out in the wilderness before they are fit to hold office again. Again, Obama and perhaps even Sarkozy now look like our best bets. The extreme anglo-saxon model has failed. The French actually have been proved to be not so stupid after all.
Complain about this comment
118. The answer to your question is, of course, NO!
Complain about this comment
All this was caused by Blair and Bush taking us to war - which is still going on. As a result also we are running the threat of terroist attacks here in our own country every second of the day or night.
Great. Thanks NEW LABOUR.
Complain about this comment
JR and flamepatricia: not so fast! I assume you agree that, in the current extremely grave situation, we (and other governments) ought to be spending money to keep as much of the productive real economy afloat? And that can mean everything from general fiscal stimulus, through the partial nationalisation of banks that we have seen, through the rescue of the US automotive sector etc. etc..
There is a big difference in view on here. There seems to be a 'Hard Tory' line (let's call it the 'Calvin Coolidge Memorial Tendency' after the President who helped create the Great Depression) that seems to think that the best thing to do in a global crisis is to sit on your hands, put your hands over your eyes, and hope for the best. Yes, let's not borrow more to counteract the current massively deflationary tendencies, let's just pray.
This is obvious idiocy, and has only been taken up by the Tories because (a) they can hardly admit that the extreme capitalist experiment has been a complete disaster, (b) ideologically they can't now support the measure required to get us out of the mess without looking silly, and (c) they are cynically and irresponsibly trying to win the next election by frightening the economically illiterate middle classes ('think of the global economy as if it's a corner shop') about increased taxes. If we follow Tory policies most of the middle classes won't have jobs, so they won't need to worry much anymore about high taxes.
So then the question becomes what is the best way for governments now to massively intervene in the global economy to stop it completely collapsing. Clearly some things that make a lot of sense now are: nationalising the banks as we have done, forcing the banks to lend (supported strongly today by the FT!), and supporting strategic sectors of the economy such as the US automotive sector - the knock-on effects of collapse are simply too great (read Nobel Economist Paul Krugman in the New York Times).
In terms of stimulus, the classic idea is that the best way to pump money into the economy at this time is through capital public works (roads, bridges, rail etc. etc.). This is how you get the biggest bang for the buck, and you improve the productivity and competitiveness of the economy at the same time. The US in particular has a huge need to do this anyway to make its economy more productive, and I think we can trust the Obama Team to head massively in this direction. The UK Government should follow suit. And borrow what it needs to do so. Anything else is just waiting for us all to die.
Complain about this comment
post 126 Novoludo
Your analysis implies the failure of the free market approach to wealth creation and thus better welfare provision promoted by Thatcher and Reagan and all who followed.
You are wrong.......in part......
It is simple......... the current crisis is not bourne from an inherent failure of capitalism per se but rather from a failure of Government to GOVERN! Governing means setting out the rules and regulations that affect all our lives and clearly Brown and Clinton ( then Bush) departed from proper governance of the financial system. This is the ROOT CAUSE of the current problems...............GOVERNANCE...not capitalism.
And the fact is that we are now faced with the consequences of these failures of Brown, Clinton and Bush which are now being compounded by the fact that Brown has squandered all the wealth that has been created in the last economic cycle.............
So the question is why did he not "save" some of the proceeds of growth for a rainy day?
Simple. The man is so arrogant he REALLY believed that he single-handedly had abolished boom and bust in the UK ..........
And now he thinks he has the answers too!
It's a total joke!
It is Governanve which is at fault here............not capitalism..............that has brought unparalled prosperity for everyone compared to 100 years ago when 90% of the Victorian British population lived in the type of poverty that the Eastern block were still living in under Socialism until 1989!
Complain about this comment
Novoludo
My objective in what I have written is very narrow. Stimulus via the retail economy is, whether we like it or not, what Darling and Brown are about to do. I'm actually being intentionally negative, in going no further than showing that it has no earthly chance of working; I'm not trying to suggest an alternative approach that will work.
Frankly, I think that if we have good reason to think that a plan won't work, and if executing that plan removes the opportunity to try something later that may work (and in this case it certainly does, because we will have no money, and no opportunity to borrow more either) then we shouldn't do it. I think we should be watching, waiting and ready to fight fires. I think we should not be taking action in a blind panic, motivated by the desire to be seen to be doing something and to be popular.
What you said about capital public works is interesting, but my concerns about it are the same - certainly where I am (South East England), the proportion of British labour deployed on building projects is quite small, and most of the work is done by imported tradesmen from Eastern Europe and elsewhere, so again, the benefits of the stimulus are largely exported and don't help our economy at all. But if you think that the availability of local labour is greater in other areas of the country, and that it would genuinely be used by the contractors, then your ideas do have potential traction.
But indulge me in my main point, which I suspect you share. Stimulating the economy by borrowing billions, and then using the proceeds to get people to buy large quantities of imported white goods, is a dead duck of the most rancid kind.
Complain about this comment
#118
I agree with what appears to be the central thrust of your post that giving a flat handout in tax is pointless, I for example would take mine and save it without spending a penny of it.
However if you curbed the xenophobia a bit your point might be more widely replied to rather than stuck in the bucket marked BNP tripe.
The TV is made in Korea (by Koreans, of course)
or it might have been assembled in Wales at the Toshiba plant there if you find out which models are available and which are part produced here. Might cost you more and not be precisely what you wanted but you'd be willing to pay to support British jobs wouldn't you.
It was transported here on a Singaporean owned and crewed ship
Which pays piloting and landing charges to a UK port. Employs people at the ports to unload it and pilot it. Customs officers to inspect it etc.
It was delivered to the shop by a Polish company
or possibly it was delivered by anyone of the thousands of British drivers on our roads and UK owned transport companies.
The shop itself is ultimately German-owned
Err no - you could by it from a wide variety of other stores which are not foreign owned e.g. Tesco, Sainsbury, John Lewis, a DSG brand store. You would in fact have to look very hard to fulfil your statement. All which would pay some tax on the profit.
The shop assistant is Czech and sends all his spare money to his family in Prague
He does however have to pay UK tax on it, his employer pays NI which funds the health service which he cannot use and whilst living here will be paying rent and buying food in our shops.
Even the electricity it uses is generated from Russian gas sold into the UK by a French middle-man
or you could pay the premium for green energy which is not or select the remaining UK owned electricity supply company. You could even buy a generator and forget the whole lot as you feel so strongly about it.
[Frankly, even if the TV blows up, the water to put out the resulting fire is delivered by a French-owned company]. Only if you are an idiot - electricity and water don;t mix. Call the UK Fire Brigade using Saxon vehicles which were made here. Make your claim to an insurer who still has a UK call centre and business.
So, my question is, how does this "stimulus" help the British economy?
Centrally a short term splurge would not have the right effect but it would be short term benefit and not what is required right now.
Complain about this comment
Ill bet dear old John Ebenezer Brown used to say.... neither a borrower, nor a lender be..... a lot more often.
100 billion.... Christ.
Now add PFIs and public sector pension commitments.
12% of GDP on interest.....
My thoughts are unprintable.
Shame we didnt save a few quid during the good times Eh?
Complain about this comment
NorthernThatcherite, we may be getting a bit semantic here, since I actually agree with alot of what you say.
You argue that 'capitalism per se' has not failed, but 'government regulation' has. This seems a very odd way of putting it, as if these two things are completely distinct.
As noted above at#97, what has 'failed' is an integrated private sector / government form of extremely deregulated capitalism which has been essentially practised since the late seventies. That is: the actually existing capitalism of the last thirty years is the one that has failed. Completely inadequate government regulation and a naive faith in markets were a completely integral part of that form of capitalism.
Extreme capitalism has failed. Bankers, regulators and government officials, the joint high priests of extreme capitalism, are all to blame. On the political side, Reagan and Thatcher, Clinton and Brown, Bush and Greenspan - are all to blame.
This is our starting point. The economic dispensation of the last thirty years has failed. We in the UK are particularly unfortunate because ALL our political parties have more or less bought into this irrational nonsense. Barack Obama is not of course, as claimed by many neanderthal Republicans, a socialist. But he does not seem to share in the ideological fantasies of the last thirty years. And as such there is at least some hope that he can lead us out of the dead end of this particularly absurd form of capitalism.
Complain about this comment
Actually, they have. It's just that they're big issues in themselves and people can only process so much at a time. I've linked to an article that walked through the entire sub-prime issue (that nobody read), and the Guardian is covering more resource issues in an article on land and food production.
Sounds about right. The bubble finally burst and this is a great opportunity to reshape and reform. It's possible some better structures and attitudes will come out of this which we'll all benefit from.
The Anglo-Saxon model is dead. That's D-E-A-D for anyone that's missed it. I figure, something more purposeful and joined up needs to take its place. People don't need big shocks and rushing around anymore. Seizing on more Thatcherism will just show we don't get it... again.
My general view is that the focus should be on jobs creation and fair wages. Business has to innovate and create jobs that people want, rather than them being risk averse and people being whipped into submission. Indeed, that great capital of international Communism, America, is poised to go down that track.
If people can get over this blip and the siren call of an unreformed Tory party the big economic lie will be blown. Folks will see there are alternatives and the Tory claim of cleaning up Labour's "mess" as mere sloganised emotionalism.
I note Hazel Blears focusing on continuing to develop a better alternative and Polly Toynbee flushing out the Tories "dark side". Good. It's nice to see the girls are paying attention. That's what I like about girls: they're diligent and nice. It sure makes a change from macho posturing.
Complain about this comment
JR - We agree about a lot. One thing I don't quite understand why you are not a bit more concerned about the impact of our policies outside our own shores - and indeed the impact of other governments' policies on us?
Of course, it would be be a bit crazy for us to borrow massively just to create jobs in China. But, firstly, some of the stimulus in all cases would benefit us (goods are sold through UK retailers after all). And, secondly, it is really not that bad an idea to be doing things which enable the likes of China and India to keep buying things from the rest of the world (including us). I do believe we are basically all in this together on this one.
Complain about this comment
#110 the real (cough) truth
Did you read the whole article?
It appears you didn't - the whole argument was that your point "2. In 1993, during the last recession, the Conservative government borrowed about ?51bn. This year, Labour is expected to borrow about ?64bn. (A record!)" is completely ridiculous.
The article contained the rulebook for most of your (and other right-wingers) posts on here:
Try these top tips:
Don't try to inform or enlighten - just generate as much heat as possible (with extra points at a time of public anxiety)
Ignore inflation - this makes it impossible to say how any quantity of pounds genuinely compares with another some years apart, but does allow many absurd, baseless comparisons
Assume that wealth doesn't matter, as if £10,000 owed by someone earning £5,000 a year is as serious a debt as it would be to Roman Abramovich
And it's game on!
re your 'debt is higher than in 1993' point, the article notes that:
If we updated the 1993 deficit to a 2008-sized economy after 15 years of inflation, it would be over £110bn, compared with this year's projected deficit of about £64bn.
And that:
In 1993 in the UK, borrowing reached 7% of GDP; today it is about half that.
So, not really supportive of your view is it?
Complain about this comment
135:
Polly Toynbee writes for The Labour leaning Guardian. Hazel Blears is a non entity. Case dismissed!
Complain about this comment
Can't see how the two issues are connected. The Arab world has had issues for a long time that would exist without the Israeli, war, and globalisation issues. In some ways they can be seen as a positive stimulus.
How does some Thatcherite style sloganised emotionalism help? It just dumbs people down and makes them upset. These are hardly the conditions to develop understanding and consensus, and positive shared growth.
Most of the tub thumping and wind from the right is driven by their fear that they're losing power and influence. It's got nothing to do with building a better world or good foreign relations, just the screaming of an ego scared of its own death.
Calm down, dear. It's only an ideology.
Complain about this comment
#135 Charles - totally agree, and thanks for the Toynbee link, which is essential reading for all blogging on here. I don't always agree with her, but she is absolutely spot on with this one. The Tories have blown it by reverting from some chance of becoming a modern progressive party, to going back to being the nasty stupid party again. Hard to fathom why. They seemed to be doing so well...
Actually, although a lifelong leftist, I think this is a big shame. We needed all the good ideas and alternatives we could at this stage. The Tories going backwards and supporting risible policies is not exactly helpful.
Complain about this comment
Post 134 Nuonludo
I am sorry but you are wrong again.......
Capitalism hasn't falied because human nature hasn't failed.
Despite the current setback, which is part of the economic cycle, but has been excacerbated by the bad governance of Brown et al, capitalism, which is the persuit of profit will emerge stronger once more. And in being stonger it will be more successful in improving the lot of the nation. Just look at Eastern Europe and China to see how successful it really is.
Your assertion is that the last 30 years has been a failure economically. Can you remember what it was like in this country in 1979? Now compare the UK as it is today even under Blunderbuss Brown. "Extreme Capitalism" has been an amazing success!
Anyway if the last 30 years under "extreme capitalism" has been so bad then please name just ONE, just ONE 30 year period in the UK's economic history when much more has been achieved to the benefit of all citizens............just ONE please......just ONE! If you can't find this period in British history then I will give you a chance to find it in world history.
I think you are just notr recognising that capitalism.the persuit of profit is by far the most perfect system for enhancing a nations well-being because it is simply in tune with human nature which is to improve the lot of the human through hardwork.
Anyway if you still don't agree please outline the type of system that will do better overall for the citizens of the UK over the next 30 years?
Over to you.............................
Complain about this comment
NorthernThatcherite - I can't disagree that the last thirty years has seen improved living standards for many. Although under this particularly extreme economic system the inequalities have meant that wealth has very unjustly gone disproportionately to the very rich (especially in the US where 'middle class' living standards have completely stagnated over the last decade and more).
And saying it is has 'all gone very well' until now is a bit strange. Like: my car drove very well for a while until it blew up suddenly and killed me.... Hmmm, maybe that's not the kind of car we want to be driving around in?
Actually my utter distaste for the crude and obvious imbecilities and immoralities of extreme capitalism (now fully on view...) may make me sound more extreme than I actually am.
Like all sensible people I am in favour of a mixed public / private economy in which we get over the silliness of 'private sector good, government bad' (or indeed vice versa). In which we realise that many things (health, education) will need to be supplied by the state, and indeed can most efficiently be done by the state (try instead the criminal wastefulness of the US health care system). In which governments must play a very strong role in regulating key sectors in the economy. And so on. It's not exactly rocket science. But also it's not what we have been doing for the last thirty years. Which is why that car completely blew up...
Complain about this comment
#Sicilian: thanks for making my point for me with your bigoted and head in the sand reaction to reading Polly Toynbee! Your reaction confirms that the Tories really have become again the nasty and stupid party. From my perspective at least now you are going to be pretty easy to beat once more (the electorate is already catching on). I suppose leopards never do change their spots...
Complain about this comment
why is every one moaning was this government voted in becouse they were the best and promissed they could do better than anyone else, so accept what they are doing becouse if there is blame you all need to look in a mirror and hope is doesnt crack.
so with all this moaning does it mean the electorate will turn their backs on neu labour i think not.
the justification for moaning is less money in your pockets well hard times happen so do bad governments and rain falling, the only way out is to not elect any of these self interested media hogging parties and elect honest people to do the job of governing killing this school yard party system we seem to have.
Complain about this comment
Post 142. Nuvoludo
The car hasn't COMPLETELY blown up.
If were lucky we'll lose 5% of GDP in the short term and in 15 years we'll be 15% ahead of where we are today. You're exaggerating with you car analogy mate.
Anyway you didn't select a 30 year period???
Oh and you asssertion that the "state" can do anything efficiently is wrong too.
We have to accept that the state has to provide it's citizens with security first then health and education but it certainly isn't the most efficient but is the most socially just way I agree.
But it is so important that the "state" doesn't become too much a burden on the wealth creating sector such that this sector becomes inefficient due to costs and controls imposed by the state.
The state needs to be checked so that private enterprise can flourish to the benefit of ALL!
Complain about this comment
38 BillMcfadden
So glad to see that the fundraising fete we ran was so successful.
You are still able to bash away at that keyboard with your unicorn-stick-forehead-prodder.
I'm hoping that this year we might have enough money left over to buy you a nice "Gordon Brown cares" poster as well.
I'd be interested to hear on your views as to how we escape the current economic calamity? What will Gordon do next? Personally I'm hoping for something that requires a vast amount of additional government spending.
Hope to see you soon, although I'm not sure if the Sunshine Variety coach stops in our street.
Complain about this comment
83. T A Griffin (TAG)
may I suggest that Gordon go to his local library and get out a couple of films which may help him on his journey, 'Tunes of Glory' and 'Fame is the Spur' go on Gordon you may learn something useful.
Oh, but not as useful as reading my comments on Nicks Glorious Blog.
Good choice, TAG, and he can include a selection of power_to_the_people's
verse. These may change the man's whole character. By the way, TAG, you still haven't answered my question on Banks To Lend More Forum #123. Who is the Lord?
Complain about this comment
Gotta say, balhamu and novaludo have come out with some great facts and written them up in a very accessible way. I've found that the more fact orientated discussion newsgroups tend to generate something better than ones that revolve around pure opinion. So, that's helpful.
One nitpick: I don't see Obama as some great leader or America leading the world, but they can provide very positive leadership and support.
America used to be very wealthy and a huge producer relative to everyone else but that's slipped drastically as other countries have taken a greater leadership and production role.
Just off the top of my head, I'm impressed by the ethos and delivery of Tata Industries, and some of the high tech manufacturers in Taiwan. Britain doesn't have anything like that anymore.
Brad Templeton's done some essays on energy production and robotic vehicles. There's great potential in these and something folks may like to read to get their head around the problems of today and get a glimpse of where we could be.
Daoism, Zen, and strategy is very simple but very hard to explain. Too much arguing and partisan attitudes tends to obscure things and rapes capital: that's one reason why the hard left and hard right turn me off - they have a partial view that believes it's the whole view. This is mistaken.
The "smile and pretend you enjoy it" philosophy of a "detoxified" extreme is only presentation. It's mere surface intellectualism when the centre of its political gravity remains out of contact with the centre. The middle-brain needs harder and longer to turn around: engineers might call this phenomena "shear".
One of the most formative books I ever read was Alvin Toffler's Third Wave. A lot of his thoughts on the "knowledge worker" and "future shock" came together in this book, as did his view that both capitalism and communism were mere perspectives on the market which is, itself, merely another layer on reality. This is something that both the left and right might benefit from reflecting on.
I heard one Zen quote this week: "We aren't defined by what we do but what we let go of". People can cling too tightly to ideas and self-image even when that threatens critical failure or death. Its sounds insanely easy and worth nothing at all, but I've found practicing letting go helps reduce some of the cynicism and damage and like, I suppose, Keynes ultimate vision leads somewhere better.
Complain about this comment
I hope you've all seen the item on Sky News where Harriet Harman is talking about the economy.
As she says "we must preserve jobs", the backdrop of the City of London shudders and shakes!
Complain about this comment
143:
The feeling is mutual!
Complain about this comment
Yin attracts Yin. Yang attracts yang. It's why I advocate routing around the shrill and partisan by keeping it calm and readable. This may take a little insight and cause a little personal discomfort but a more mature position can be developed.
The Tories are doing a great job of alienating anyone who might have sympathy with them at a national and more everyday level. Sure, it gets attention but it ultimately ends up biting them in the ass. The lone egos on the left aren't too savvy about things either.
Brad Templeton has written an essay on how the left can better communicate with the right. The positions and point scoring don't interest me but if both sides can develop the centre, or invest in long-term positive consensus, I'd be a little happier.
The British tend to be too hooked on beating people into the ground and their social skills are shot to pieces. By encouraging better quality negotiation between management and workforce, and within broken communities and families, the government is developing something useful but it hasn't, yet, become the dominant cultural approach.
Complain about this comment
post 151 CEH
Pure Piffle!
Complain about this comment
151 Now, CEH will be disappointed. ICM has a poll out tonight... Conservative 42 Labour 31 LibDems 19. So much for Gordo as saviour of the Universe. Makes it impossible for Gordo to claim the electorate is with him, which of course they are not. Spring Election LOL, June Election LOL. Gordo will take it to the last moment and have to be dragged kicking and screaming from No 10. I cant wait for that moment. I wonder I Gordo will have the courage to answer PMQ's from the other side of the House. Odds on this 1000-1 methinks. In the meantime Great Britain PLC will have been utterly stuffed. Shades of 1976-1979.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/index.php
What price a new blog from Nick on this poll and that Labour are back to core vote and nothing more.. Odds anyone....
Complain about this comment
CEH 151 & 148
Its difficult to build a concensus with people who are probably on HYS right now having a pop at single mothers. Or saying that Climate change doesn't exist because its cold in winter. Like your admirer Maxsceptic.
Robotic cars? I Sometimes don't know what you're on about. So I Googled Brad Tempelton and it came up with a fishing guide by someone called hescock. The website name is quite amusing but that's probably just a coincidence.
Complain about this comment
Wilks, the British mainstream has only really discovered net discussion in the past few years and British business doesn't really get it. A lot of the froth is just ego given free rein. It's going to take a while for rules and attitudes to develop.
Brad Templeton is the founder of the world's first .COM company, Chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and has been heavily involved in the formation of the net among other things. He's also an author and guilty of writing the Dollar Bill essay.
Yeah, I can look a bit vague and drift a bit. I was just reflecting on global economics, leadership, and where we might be after getting over this bump in the road. I'm just not geared up to writing essays at the moment or getting sucked into discussing them much. Mostly, I'm just here for conversation.
Complain about this comment
Not enough to worry about financial matters, it seems the bleeding heart brigade will soon be mourning the terrorist Rauf, who was killed in Pakistan, in an air raid by the "wicked" Americans. Just think, if he had only returned to the UK, where he is wanted on a charge of killing his own uncle, he would have been spared being killed, and would soon have been able to live at the expense of the UK tax payers. This probably helps the balance of payments somewhat!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#156
So you really have become a terrorist. As I have said in earlier comments this is wrong, we are not at war with Pakistan, we, and it is we, cannot just keep going around the world killing people. There is the rule of law, or does that not matter anymore.
Just continue to read up on the de Menezes inquest. And whilst you are about it have you read up on the Dr David Kelly inquest, because if you have then tell me about it, because there never has been one, that I know of anyway.
There is the rule of law, and there is the law of the jungle. Well you can forget the rule of law, and justice, but I won't. These killings must stop. If you want to make it legal then declare war on Pakistan, but not the justice of the drones bomb load.
The war in Iraq was illegal, the occupation is just that, we are occupying a foreign country and to put it mildly we are no different to the German Forces of Occupation in France in 1940.
I make no apology for saying that the soldiers flying these drones from their secret bases in America, where we also have some operators learning to kill remotely, so who are the war criminals.
Don't get me wrong acts of terror have been committed by individuals, but this is not the answer. This is World War III only the weapons are not as was expected, and the enemy is not a country as was expected, but this is war so let's declare it a war, a real war, no quarter asked and none given.
Yeah, let's go and nuke them, whoever they are, get it over with, stop messing, lock and load. Why prolong the agony, make my day, you know you saw the film, you read the book, you wear the t-shirt, so what's the problem. Just kill! Forget justice, forget the law, let's be animals again, thousands of years just gone, just like that.
Complain about this comment
it astounds me that the party in government in the UK, on monday will rewrite the budget because they cannot afford their own spending program!
exactly when did they realise this?
they stood in an election, and took votes on the manifesto pledges of what they will do if elected - a manifesto they cannot afford to impliment!
the government are not borrowing to pay for their plans, they are borrowing to stop the banks from collapse, they are borrowing again, to prevent the economy from collapse
astounding why people vote for them at all?
Complain about this comment
#147
You know I can't name anybody in respect of your request because for me to disclose the name would be a breach of confidentiality. You see I also have Aspidistrata Disease, and as soon as I write something it goes right out of my mind. I just have so much to think about and get involved in, now then how about that Hilary Clinton becoming Secretary of State.
Actually, does anybody else agree this is a stitch-up. Hilary stays silent during the Presidential election, or gives token support, in return she gets to be Secretary of State, is that the best they can do. Don't forget good old Bill and his charities!
Complain about this comment
#158 TAG
Read your letter just now on the way to bed. You seem one very angry man, and I respect if I don't agree with your argument. From here, it seems to me that all out war is an option nobody wants, the results are too terrible to contemplate. The fanatics who were targeted, are no more loved by the majority of Pakistan's citizens than they are by the West, and more outrage is expressed by europeans than anyone else. I am not a military expert, but it appears to me that World War III is what the West is trying to avoid. The fanatical terrorists are like rabid two-legged animals, turning the civilized world into a jungle. They are against freedom of the individual to believe or not believe in the religion of their choice, they repress women, and are anti everything that the free world represents.
You and I have totally different views on this problem, and I've answered you as best I can, but there can be no resolution to our different outlooks.
Onto a far simpler subject. I found your letter on another forum, as usual interesting and somewhat provocative. Please answer my question: Who was the Lord?
Complain about this comment
#160 TAG
Here I am replying nicely to somebody who said "So you have really become a terrorist." Very nice, that's all I need, what with all my other problems. Anyway, I'll forgive you since you say you suffer from
Aspidistrata Disease. I think there is a lot of it about at the moment, and no doubt they will bring out an injection against it.
We can certainly agree on the Hiliary issue. Good Lord, do we have to see that fearful face all the time? No wonder old Bill went bonkers in the Oval Room.
Goodnight all and don't have nightmares.
Complain about this comment
I don't blame Gordon for his 'mistakes'. He has only done what Labour always do: Tax, Borrow and Waste.
The people who must now pick up the bill are the voters. Hopefully, they'll know better next time.
Complain about this comment
By the way Nick has Crash Gordon given you any insight into what will be in the Queens speech later this year, following his previous ramblings in May?
All we got at that time was, non-costed, heavy borrowing into the future. Is he intent on building more borrowing onto his previous hype?
Complain about this comment
Just spotted another of those dubious donations from a "fat cat" to a political party. Makes you spit, doesn't it, when these well-heeled people feel they can buy influence by pumping in a couple of million..
Oh.
My mistake.
It was that nice Lord Sainsbury.
And the Labour Party.
That's OK then.
I don't know why the papers publish those rediculous and scurrilous stories implying that good folk, with totally philanthropic motives give their own money to any cause they choose.....
Complain about this comment
Looks like the big "give-away" will include about GBP 2.5Billion to "compensate" people who lost out when Brown ditched the 10p tax band.
That's not an "injection" - it's simply keeping lots of people where they were before his plundering...
Brown admitted making mistakes. (Well, he said "we" rather than "I", but we got the drift...)
Now, if he had courage, he'd reinstate the 10p band. If necessary, he could make it applicable ONLY for those whose income is below a certain threshold.
That would save all the cost associated with returning people's money to them.
Too simple, really.
And it diminishes that "dependency on the state" beloved of New Labour.
Complain about this comment
This is like the last time we had a change of government, only this time the Labour party are admitting what they are doing, and the Copnservatives or who ever becomes the next government will have to sort out the mess.
Remember 1978 any one? and the huge rise in interest rates to help government borrowing to pay for the profligate spending of the Labour party at the end of the Callaghan government.
It amazes me how anyone can vote for Labour, New or otherwise, and not expect this problem. The fact that we are paying Brussels billions for nothing, except the destruction of our country (England) does nothing to help.
The next government will take about 20 years to pay off the present borrowing, which means that Labour will be back (given previous voter form) before the countries finances are back in the black.
Complain about this comment
Earlier in this blog #50 I commented:
At least the Tories will not have a big election spend come 2010. With the predicted 3 Mill unemployed they just need to dig out the Poster they used in 1979. Labour isnt working!
It looks like they are to use that strategy, but on a different poster.
Old poster.
New poster.
However Gordon wraps it up, its still a tax bombshell!
Complain about this comment
@TAG
Well said.
Complain about this comment
There were also clear signs last night that Mr Darling will use the PBR to announce some savings in government expenditure, possibly by £5 billion a year, from an "efficiency drive."
He will hint at making major public spending cutbacks based on scrapping quangos, parts of regional government and projects such as ID cards.
What about this one Flash - A not fit for purpose government department on a 140,000 pound Xmas Beano.
I don?t think you could make this stuff up, we are in a recession and the government splashes this kind of money about.
Still its only money Flash, and they have been watching you fritter dosh away for 11 years
Complain about this comment
Interesting article in today's STimes that the Treasury mandarins are not too keen on the give away (electoral bribe).
Complain about this comment
If the Treasury are uneasy - as if the mandarins have any sense they must be - what are the odds on Brown and Darling having a bust up and Darling resigning? Just a thought on a cold Monday morning.
Complain about this comment
Ho dear it looks as though Flash Gordon is privatising and flogging off, some of the last remnants of state owned Companies, land and property.
I wonder if one of the Companies that he has groomed for sale is Remploy?
I think the following extract from the article says it all:
I do hope those anti-privatisation NuLabour numpties complain about this.
Complain about this comment
#162 and other posts by same author.
Based on your post at #156 the charge against you is not that you are a terrorist but that you are a supporter of terrorism.
For this charge not to have merit you need to explain the legal basis on which the US is able to rely in order to justify its conducting military operations inside Pakistan.
If you can identify any such law perhaps you can explain whether this law would also have entitled to the US to bomb Leeds - a city known to have hosted terrorists. Would this same law have entitled the RAF to bomb Boston Mass. - a city known to have hosted IRA fundraisers?
In your post #161 your refer to the difficulty in reconciling differing outlooks. In this instance the resolution is simple - either explain the legal basis on which such actions are justified or confirm that you do not support the rule of law.
Complain about this comment
It is good for the country at this time, so support this government. We have to move people out of the misery this is the way that can be achieve it.
On national interest we should stop immigration and make unemployed British workers work again. It will be much cheaper than letting foreign workers into this country. Main problem our people have is generous benefits that make they stay at home and produce more kids to get more benefits. We have to move away and start skilling them so that they can stand on their own feet.
Most of the one million plus Eastern Europeans who came here were doing unskilled and semi skilled jobs, if our people have been forced to do these jobs we would have achieved full employment and we will not be in the mess we are in now. We could have saved billions and even cut taxes and increased pensions by now.
The blame for this should fall on the Labour Government but now it seems that they are trying to sort the mess, so the hard working British people should support them and encourage to move the country in the correct direction.
Complain about this comment
#162
Now I hope that you watched a certain Lord Mandelson on the Andrew Marr show this morning.
Now I used to be employed by a mercant bank in the City. Therefore I was not a bank I was a banker, how interesting that the labour politicians continue to refer to calling in the banks for conversations. A bank is a financial institution, with a building known as a bank. They cannot have any conversations with anybody. You have conversations with people, not banks. So, get it right please.
As for Mandelson, sorry Lord Mandelson of somewhere or other, what a small minded person. He was almost threatening the bankers with a re-education programme, you will do as you are told. Scary, is that really the sort of society we want, run b unelected people like Mandelson.
As for Cable, who came over as rather threatening towards the bankers. Well I wonder if people would like to nationalise the oil industry in this country, because they are making even more money than the banks are. Do remember that Mr Cable used to work for I believe Shell Transport and Trading, which is the old real name of Royal Dutch Shell. Now why not nationalise the oil companies, like Churchill did effectively with British Petroleum when they were given contracts to supply oil to the Royal Navy when they transfrred form using coal. Oh, and let's not forget it was Shell which misrepresented it s oil reserves, any comment on that one Vince.
Whilst we are about it, let's not have any doctors working as independent cotractors within the NHS, and let's nationalise the drug companies whilst we are about it. We are on the road to serfdom, somebody has to stop this, come on Cameron., this is a crisis budget and if there is any sanity left then the package has to be voted against. The first person to tell the people in the real world the truth will win the next election, even though with the mess we are in it will be a phyrric victory.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I think that there is another film which should be shown on natio al TV so as to get people thinking about where we are.
The film? 'They Shoot Horses Don't They' an absolutely brilliant film which captures exactly where this country is nowadays. Please show it, people may learn something.
Complain about this comment
A direct lift from Dominic Lawson in today' STimes
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5213485.ece
The deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), John Lipsky, said: ?Fiscal action may not be advisable in countries with greater vulnerabilities, or those where debt sustainability is a major concern. Thus, those best able to finance new fiscal efforts and those with clearly sustainable debt positions should take the lead.?
In other words, Britain is specifically not being asked to take a lead, however much it flatters the prime minister?s vanity to pretend the opposite.
Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), observed: ?You have, unfortunately, countries that have already no room for manoeuvring. In those particular cases fiscal activism, instead of having a positive impact on the economy, could harm confidence, as economic agents would expect government authorities to address these imbalances, by increasing taxation a posteriori.?
Add that to the G20 summit statement and it makes Brown's claim that he has the agreement of the world increasingly without merit.
Complain about this comment
I don't know if anyone else has raised this, but if the Chancellor (i.e. Gordon Brown in disguise) lowers VAT by 2.5% then this may be another of his tricks. I was under the impression that a percentage of VAT goes straight to the EU coffers as it is an EU tax, which would mean it is the EU that would in theory fund this in part. Now knowing the EU pretty well I can't imagine France and Germany allowing GB to grab a chunk of the 12.5 Billion pounds out of their cosseted spending schemes without protest, who knows, since the CAP is 40% of the EU budget that means 40% of that 12.5 billion was destined for the CAP (5 billion). So far I've not found the percentage that goes to the EU on Wikipedia, anyone any ideas?
Maybe somebody can correct my thinking on this as I'm interested to see whether what I've heard is the situation. If this is the case then Brown is raiding the EU budget so that he can raise UK taxes later on whilst claiming it's to repay the lowering of VAT, i.e. he gets the money twice.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
there is going to be a huge problem which is beginning to be picked-up on. If we, as a country, are going to have to borrow money who are we going to borrow it from?
I do want to be in debt to either Saudi Arabia nor China. 'He who pays the piper calls the tune', that's the one, be afraid Britain, very afraid.
In an historic context, look at World Wars I and II. The only way that Britain could keep fighting, with our soldiers killing and being killed in huge numbers was because we had access to borrowed money, money which we borrowed from America. That is what Europeans mean when they refer to victory of the Anglo-Saxons.
Consider that America was meant to be neautral at the beginning of WWI, they immediately had a problem because they lent money to Britain, but not to Germany, explain to me how neautral that was? Anybody!
Complain about this comment
Compulsion and the low-wage economy is dead end slavery. That's one reason why I bang on about job creation and fair wages. People tend to respond better to a positive.
Lots of folks may have degrees and there may be a high level of "worklessness", but a lot of jobs are deskilled, meaningful training doesn't happen, and creativity and ambition are stifled. Plus, the middle and high income earners have, effectively, stolen income from the bottom with taxation and earnings distribution being artificially skewed in their favour.
The problem isn't lack of leadership or relevance at the bottom, it's arrogance and greed at the top that's the problem. It actively constrains opportunity and marginalises people as it competes for the available capital without restraint, and is a major reason why the financial crisis occured.
You can see a similar mechanism operate in this blog every day. As the pro-Tory trolls insist their version of the "truth" is right and jocky for attention they get more nuts and unpleasant as each day goes by. Their belief that they're the only ones who are right and desire to own the whole cake has driven everyone else away.
Complain about this comment
I have heard Brown interviewed on several occasions recently - most recently on the Jeremy Vine show. I would like to know why he has not been asked directly "why this country ended 15 years of continuous growth with public finances in a mess, with a large borrowing requirement?". Brown should be asked this question repeatedly, not that you would get an answer.
Brown likes to say that other countries are planning their own fiscal stimulus to give him cover. What he does not say is that many of these countries were running a Budget surplus before the credit crunch hit. Australia was in surplus, Sweden was in surplus, why was the UK in such a bad situation? (Rhetorical question - the answer is that Brown wasted the money).
Complain about this comment
#175
You use the word 'forced' in respect of workers and work.
Excuse me, but what sort of society do you actually want. Let's force young men with poor education to join the army, you've seen the adverts, so it seems an interesting life.
Yes, join the army, jump out of planes, going skiing in Norway, go to the jungle to learn how to survive in a post apocalypse world, oh and let's learn how to 'fly' a drone and kill people remotely. Yes, let's force people shall we? Let's force them by giving them no options other than to do as they are told.
Let's live in a a country based on East Germany with your next door neighbour writing reports on what you said, who you saw, what you did. Check that bin for contraband, for putting the wrong materials in it, too many bottles, you must be an alcoholic.
Oh yes, like Gordon, I am angry all right, not like him for not knowing about what is going on though, I am angry because I do see what is going on, and I can do nothing about it other than to tell the world through the BBC and your comments faclity Nick, thank you. Oh and the moderators, who let me say it.
Complain about this comment
At 172 I should have said Sunday morning. But Monday morning is likely to be cold too - and not just as far as the temperature is concerned.
Complain about this comment
Looks like as we tighten our belts those nice people at the treasury are getting mega bucks bonuses.
Whilst our hard pushed front line workers, such as nurses and police got a mere pittance in pay rises the pen pushers in the civil service get rises and bonuses probably worth more than the pay increase given to the former professions.
This must be NuLabours form of socialism.
Complain about this comment
More Labour sleaze
Complain about this comment
181 thinks this blog is one huge computer game with a them and us. Ha!. More of Us here than Them. He obviously sees it as a challenge from across the pond there.
Complain about this comment
#181 Charley_E_Hardwork
I see you are still gazing at your belly button Charlie!
rofl.
Keep up the good work Charlie.
Complain about this comment
Brown steers into ruin
Very good article.
Complain about this comment
#181 Charley_E_Hardwork
Yep haven?t your party NuLabour done well and it only took them 11 years!!!
But you do forget the doubling of tax for our lowest earners. I dare say that the 10p tax cock-up did redistribute some of the wealth to middle income earners. But you should know that considering your admission to having a similar mindset to Flash Gordon.
Complain about this comment
There is a fundamental defect to the government's plan.
Their assumption is that a fiscal boost will reverse the prospect of recession.
It won't: we have been heading for recession since oil hit US dollar 147 a barrel.
The collapse of the banking system was additional to that event.
Now we are dealing with the consequences of the banking collapse. The banks may have been bailed out but that does not mean that liquidity is now available.
Interest rates have been cut and may be cut again but that has not meant freeing up the flow of cash. It has just knackered the return on savings: savings which are needed to support greater liquidity.
We are now in the department of own-goals and heading for a slump. All that has worked so far has been the guarantee for the banks. Since this was action taken in a limited and defined part of the economy, it was succesful. It is going to be much more difficult to turn the economy around.
It is going to need a lot more than just some tax cuts. We are in heap-big trouble.
Complain about this comment
dhwilkinson @154,
You've been taking my name in vain. Tut tut.
Without entering into a debate about the 'Green Religion', I?d just like to point out that I have never ?denied? climate change - it is happening- and always has been. My argument is whether or not we need to panic and institute a wide range of ridiculous measures to ?combat? the inevitable - or behave in a rational manner and adapt to changing circumstances.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
'Dave' Cameron said this morning he is being brave in disagreeing with the government's package to get the economy back on track.....foolhardy more like.
Having spent over 3 years doing doodley squat other than marketing himself, Cameron is left floundering in the face of having to make big decisions. Any leader of an opposition party worthy of the name would have spent the time planning a alternative vision for the country.
He is a failure.
Call an Election!
Then let the tories try again with a new learder after it.
Bill
Complain about this comment
#146
jonatahn_cook
Nice to see you living up to and displaying the 'nasty party' values.
Cameron has failed to change the tories...and you are the living proof.
Bill
Complain about this comment
#181, Charles_E_Hardwidge,
I suppose your new Labour droogs are of course poor enslaved, repressed workers being exploited at the hands of your greedy bosses. The problem with your words are that you still believe in a class war with us and them. Even part of my own family that are solid Labour and worked in the docks around Liverpool have realised that things have moved on since the thirties.
It is one of the great shames that most Socialist politicians are in fact repressed capitalists who use politics as a means of getting what they can't do by flair or ability. It is rare that you find a Socialist conviction politician and that applies across the EU as corruption and Socialism seem to be bosom buddies. Thinking that the workers are in any way important and to be protected, laugh on, we're just canon fodder for their great Socialist dream, to be kept poor, scrabbling for the crumbs they graciously throw the serfs, so that they (Socialists) keep on getting elected on the false premise that if we don't vote for them the bosses party will be worse.
PS On the Andrew Marr show this morning, Mandy, Cameron and Clegg were all interviewed, the first was only interested in the 'attack is the best form of defense' policy as it is pretty well impossible to deny Brown's mismanagement, and came across as a smug self indulgent manipulator who gives not a hoot for anybody. The other two had much more handle on the current problems and seemed to have more ideas of what could be the solution(s), and borrowing to talk up Nu-Labour is not one of them. I wonder if the polls go up with tomorrows give away there will be a surprise election.
Complain about this comment
137. balhamu (choke)
If you beleive that it doesn't matter how much debt the UK is put in, then I guess there is nothing to discuss.
I think it does matter - but then I am one of the people who is going to be expected to pay it back.
Complain about this comment
Here?s the weird thing.
The mainstream news media (including the BBC, of course) remains fixated on the usual trivia, eg ?John Sergeant Leaves Last Dance for Strictly Come Dancing Audience?, ?McDonald?s Sued Over Nude Photos?, ?Hylton Checks Out ? Rachel Loses X-Factor Sing-Off? etc etc: these are headline BBC stories for goodness? sake.
Scratching beneath the surface (ie exploring the more apolitical websites and those published by orgs/people with expert economic/financial knowledge - as far as I can discern, anyway), one discovers a dark world of armageddon. What is really going on here?
The next huge thing most likely to capture the tabloid press?s imagination and, hence, the thoughts of the proverbial man-on-the-street, will be the collapse of one or more of the big car makers. I?m also worried about interbank lending and some of the key spreads: they seem to be heading the wrong way again if I?m reading the rhunes correctly?
In a more general sense, our politicians are plain crazy to be backing the idea of ever more higher levels of debt as the panacea for this crisis. The problem is that the alternative is so singularly scary that they?re now stampeding.
That alternative, as far as I can tell, is to deleverage nations, businesses and individuals back to the ?true value? of things (whatever that is) and for us to live sustainably (ie without cheap energy). Ha ha! That in turn means culling the earth?s population back to about 2 ? 3 billion people. It also means unimaginable grief to get there.
No wonder our politicians are stampeding to cosmic levels of debt with no exit strategy: they?re in a blind panic.
I hope, Dear Reader, that you have a plan for what lies ahead.
Complain about this comment
Good morning, on this cold and wet Sunday.
Well, right down to defending my corner.
174. At 10:06am on 23 Nov 2008, armagediontimes
Based on your post at #156 the charge against you is not that you are a terrorist but that you are a supporter of terrorism.
SORRY, ARMAGEDIONTIMES, BUT TAG #158 WRITES: So you really have become a terrorist.
THERE IT IS WRITING!
Unfortunately, when dealing with terrorists, the legal rules of engagement cannot apply. Terrorists operate outide all the norms, killing civilians, commiting atrocities, and using any means to gain their objectives. They are the first to cry "Unfair", and rely on the knee-jerk reactions of naive well-meaning men. Just notice how often terrorists claim their hideouts were private homes, always having WEDDING PARTIES and filled with women and children. Terrorists deliberately select their bases to accomodate these claims.
I can barely bother to debate with these 'liberals', they are so poisoned by hate for the West, and especially the USA. World War II was a legal war, yet many now condemn Bomber Harris for attacking cities with large populations of civilisations. More tears are shed for those Germans than the ruined cities of London, Coventry and many others.
You then go on:
In your post #161 your refer to the difficulty in reconciling differing outlooks. In this instance the resolution is simple - either explain the legal basis on which such actions are justified or confirm that you do not support the rule of law.
I HAVE TRIED ABOVE TO EXPLAIN MY HYPOTHESIS. BY THE VERY ACTION OF TERRORISTS,
THE RULE OF LAW HAS BROKEN DOWN AND IT IS A FIGHT FOR THE SURVIVAL FOR CIVILISATION AS WE BELIEVE IT TO BE. NOT FUNDAMENTALISM, NOT DICTATORSHIP.
I now have to go out, so will leave the forum until this evening. Looking forwardd to crossing swords then.
Complain about this comment
Just watching John Sopel interviewing Gordon Brown on The Politics Show.
The rehearsed answers are without stammers, stutters, ums and ahs - and he is employing the tactic of 'let me finish' to stop further questions. The unrehearsed answers are quite different.
How telling.
Complain about this comment
Post 177 agree re the film they shoot horses don't they. Very sad and very emotive but it could well get that bad in the UK. Just imagine it with a dance contest for poor people for the amusement of the rich.
Only problem now is that Simon Cowell would film it put it on the tv and people would pay a pound to save or vote off contestants.
We are actaully going back to the bad old days of 1976 and lets wait for the IMF.
Anyone else see Tony Blair as Harold Wilson; Gordon Brown as Jim callaghan with Alistair darling as Dennis Healley? Must be those bushy eye brows.
Complain about this comment
156 phoenixarisonq
Good morning
Sorry I'm a little late I felt that I had to go to church this morninig to pray for that poor misunderstood British subject Rauf I felt that the fact that he almost certainly killed his uncle and was planning to blow out of the sky many innocent men women and children was no justification for killing him, after all he was only sitting amongst the Worlds most proliferate terrorists, no justification there then.
Perhaps if we had asked him to step over the border then it would have been alright, I don't somehow feel he would have done that terrorists are not to keen on fighting fair.
I'm afraid that Tag is running his own crusade and is a very bitter and in my opinion a very misguided man, his views are becoming more bizare every day,. I suppose he would think that if Hitler had taken a day trip to Spain and someone from the allies had shot him dead he would say that wasn't fair he was on holiday you shouldn't do that.
TAG has not the slightest idea whether the
Pakistan government were consulted about this raid,maybe they were but dont wish to advertise the fact due to the number of terrorists within that country.
As far as I am concerned I don't give a damn where or how terrorists are killed in the same way as they dont give a damn where they go to kill hundreds of innocent men women and children, and I dont care if their killed by drones, bombs, bullets or a overdose of poison as long as we stop them.
sSo all you do gooders out there before you start mourning over this unsavoury character take a vist to the graves of just some of the victims of this type of scum.
Complain about this comment
Please Nick dont take this out on me I am only the messenger:
Looks like journalist standards have dropped.
The article above entitled - The Hugo Young Papers is well worth a read.
Complain about this comment
159 Denzil69
I t seems that everything astounds you.
What astounds me is that you havent noticed the change in the world economies in the last six months.
I suppose that if the government just carried on with the manifesto that was written about three years ago then you would think they were doing fine, its time for you to take a look around and see what is going in the world, you will then be justifiably astounded.
Complain about this comment
#197 unreal
Where did I say that?
My point (and the one the article was making) that your non-inflation, non-GDP adjusted figures you use when you complain about 'record levels of debt' are phoney.
But no worries for you - keep following your 3 rules:
Don't try to inform or enlighten - just generate as much heat as possible (with extra points at a time of public anxiety)
Ignore inflation - this makes it impossible to say how any quantity of pounds genuinely compares with another some years apart, but does allow many absurd, baseless comparisons
Assume that wealth doesn't matter, as if ?10,000 owed by someone earning ?5,000 a year is as serious a debt as it would be to Roman Abramovich
And it's game on!
The article was well-balanced (as Mark picked up on in #113).
Complain about this comment
163 Distant traveller
#The people who must now pick up the bill are the voters. Hopefully, they'll know better next time.
Do you recall a time when the tax payer didn't pick up the bill whatever party is in power.
I make no claim to have any knowledge of economics,but I'm pretty sure that the only way the governments of this country have ever got money is through taxes.
Complain about this comment
#199
Sorry for typographical errors and brain and fingers not being coordinated.
"cities with large populations of civilisations" should have read "civilians".
Complain about this comment
174 armagediontimes
#Based on your post at #156 the charge against you is not that you are a terrorist but that you are a supporter of terrorism.
And my charge against you is that you are a terrorist lover and I am quite sure that 156 would be supported far far more than 174 unless the vote was taken on the borders of Pakistan.
Complain about this comment
180 TAG
#Consider that America was meant to be neautral at the beginning of WWI, they immediately had a problem because they lent money to Britain, but not to Germany, explain to me how neautral that was? Anybody!
and of course you with you incredible sense of fairness think that they should have lent the Nazi's the same amount, so then they could have killed the same amount each, I wonder if that gentleman that sunk of Plymouth would agree with you.
Complain about this comment
174 armegediontimes
You had that removed pretty quick didnt you its fine for you to call a poster a supporter of terrorism but not for me to call someone a lover of terrorism wouldn't have thought there was to much between them you had best go and play with the children.
I think you will find referrers are frowned upon on these blogs.
Complain about this comment
200 jonties
#The rehearsed answers are without stammers, stutters, ums and ahs - and he is employing the tactic of 'let me finish' to stop further questions. The unrehearsed answers are quite different.
Isn't that strange I came to exactly the same conclusion in the David Cameron -Andrew Marr show
Complain about this comment
210 I have to apologise to you armegediontimes it seems it wasn't my answer to you that was referred and for that I apologise.
Complain about this comment
#210 grandantidote
Good day, grandantidote,
I'm in my coat ready to trot off, but saw your blog. Many thanks for your support, but even if you disagreed with me and called me all the names under the sun, I'd never dream of referring you, or anybody. I'd go so far as saying referring a blog is an act of terrorism, unless it is admitted here on the forum, with an explanation as to why it was done.
Complain about this comment
#209
The Germans in WWI were not Nazis, unless you want to rewrite history.
Complain about this comment
Anyone who still believes anything Labour say is a fool. All they do is lie, cheat and spin, and the usual Labour bloggers (planted by Labour HQ no doubt) bend over and ask for more.
Don't come crying to us when you finally realise the massive borrowing will cripple you. You've been warned, and if you vote for Nu-Lab again you'll get the rotten Britain you deserve!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I saw the politics show this morning with the interview with Gordon Brown.
He really does not seem to understand that he is the Prime Minister not the chancellor. Will somebody tell him that he was responsible for the the overthrow of the Prime Minister who led the labour party into the last general electionon the basis that he would serve a full term. He also had a manifesto committment to hold a referendum on something about Europe.
Gordon seemed to be saying that the world is listening to him because of his experience. Umm.Ok. But does he not have a problem. He said he was angry with the banks, ok. because they were not open and pransparent, so his experience over many years in government as chancellor, he was not able to know what the banks were doing?
As Sopel pointed out he did not see the banks, formerly the Building Societies, offering 125% mortgages. So much for experience, he seemed to be a slow learner. He seemed to be saying that there was some sort of shadow banking system which he did not know about, again, ummmm!
So the definition of boom and bust is 15% interest rates, is what he seemed to be saying, well, can he be sure, because look at Iceland, riots starting to happen in the streets, how long before they have hyper-inflation. How long before riots in our streets again?
Sorry Gordon, at least he admitted that the banks are important to the financial system, well you could have knocked me over with a feather!
Complain about this comment
192 maxsceptic
So you've sent this again. I didn't moderate the original by the way.
Of course what you have said is also a religious belief. Which must be respected. Little point in argueing with you. We will all probably have to change anyway to save money.
Complain about this comment
re: 214, TAG
He's a Nu-Lab oik, of course he wants to re-write history!
Complain about this comment
Re 208. If there is a point, other than invective, your comment then I have missed it.
How is it possible for anything that I have written to be reasonably construed as meaning that "I love terrrorism"?
All actions taken by government authorities be that domestic tax raising or bombing people are required to have a basis in law. I merely asked which law authorised the US bombing of sovereign Pakistani territory.
If there is no such law then the US action was illegal and hence can be reasonably defined as an act of terrorism by the United States. If there is such a law then I am in error and the action was justified.
As you appear so keen to support the action it seems to reasonable to expect that you are able to explain on what basis this incident was lawful.
Complain about this comment
196. I didn't see Clegg on Marr, only Vince Cable.
Complain about this comment
183. At 10:48am on 23 Nov 2008, T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:
What is wrong on forcing people to work; only forced needed is cut in benefits. Based on the rest you wrote, looks like you are work shy and want to stay on benefits.
I am asking you the same question; what sort of society you want? One where most people work, work very long hours to make ends meet and look after the work shy. Some have been claiming benefits for generation, is this fair on the society?
These work shy are the cause of most anti social behavior in this country as they have lots of time in their hands and upset that they cannot have this and that, never mind most others work hard to achieve what they got.
Complain about this comment
It's a bit rich of Gordon the Golem to be complaining about the "off balance sheet" liabilities of the banks when he has billions and billions of PPP and PFI liabilities off the government balance sheet.
Complain about this comment
193 maxsceptic
A very interesting comment. But that's a matter between you and your arch nemesis.
Complain about this comment
219. armagediontimes
Dear Sir/Madam,
Just a hyothetical question.
If somebody was being attacked by thugs using boots, knuckledusters and a knife, would he be expected to apply the Queensbury Rules in his defence?
Perhaps it would be considered unlawful if the victim seriously injured or even killed one of his attackers and retrieved the property they intended to steal. Maybe it would be said, these poor guys were deprived, didn't have a good start in life, etc. and the intended victim acted illegally using all his strength and intelligence to beat them off.
Complain about this comment
Re 199 It is difficult to know where to begin in answering someone who does not believe in the rule of law.
You attempt to justify this on the basis that terrorists themselves operate outside of the law then therefore so should we.
This is a wholly fallacious argument. All criminals by definition operate outside of the law. If the proper response to crime is supposed to be more crime then clearly there is no need for a legal system.
If you just want to suspend the law in so far as terrorists are concerned then you still need to explain why it would not be appropriate to bomb Leeds or Boston Mass.
It is manifestly untrue to claim that the rule of law has broken down. The existence of crime is not synonomous with an absence of law.
The justification for acts of violence has nothing to do with any "hypothosis" and everything to do with seeking to understand on what objective basis any such act of can be justified. The law provides for such a test. Any disregard for such a test means that the perpetrator is likely engaging in a criminal activity.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#221
As you ask I am retired from working in the City and working as a consultant setting up investment banking custodial and custodial systems thoroughout, well more places than I care to mention.
I was also responsible for ensuring that the assets held on behalf of our clients was fairly vaued, this job I did very well.
Why I am angry is that I cannot understand how people who should have been doing a certain job have failed so miserably. The problem is that we seem to live in a society where people do as they are told without question, that they follow orders and ignore the implications. Why did people working for the banks authorise laons which they knew the reipient could not afford, because they were following orders and if they didn't they would get the sack.
Why is that de Menezes was shot, because people were following orders, why did Dr David Kelly die, could it be because somebody was told to release his name into the public domain, that they followed orders?
I am beginning to detest this government, all government, because people are doing things that they know are wrong, because they are following orders. Who is giving these orders?
The BBC know all about people following orders or being over-ridden on their decisions because somebody else has the money, or power, to give those orders. Do as you are told, by the way where is Prince Harry, oh that's right watching the Rugby, what a great war he is having.
Complain about this comment
I am slightly surprised that one of the big tax cuts is in VAT as I really don't see how that will really work.
Small ticket items will only go down by pennies - which do we really expect the stores to pass on in a time when their profits are dropping? Especially as stores will have costs involved with changing the prices
Big ticket items will drop by a noticable ammount (a £500 computer will go down by £12.50) however these items are not impulse buys and encouraging people to buy these type of items if they can't really afford them is only going to make matters worse.
And any delay in applying these changes (the report mentioned that they might not apply to after Christmas) is just going to cause more problems as people will hold off buying products until they take place (and the tax reductions will probably be rolled into "sale prices" by the stores)
Complain about this comment
227. T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:
#221
Why is that de Menezes was shot, because people were following orders,
Perhaps if people had followed orders this unfortunate man would not have been shot.
He was illegally in this country, pretending to be a student, on a student's visa. If the agencies responsible had done their job, checking on whether visas were being used correctly, or if people had outstayed their time here, the poor man would still be alive.
Complain about this comment
Cheap party politics? I've always found plenty whenever Brown opens his mouth or when his underemployed pretend-chancellor, Alastair, does the same.
I hear the polls are showing the two largest parties roughly where they were before MORI accidentally polled people on some other planet, i.e. with an eleven percent sort of lead for Dave and George.
If I were a fan of Brown's, like Batson D Belfry [?], I'd wonder why Brown shouting across the House of Commons that 'They [the Tories] were wrong when... They were wrong when... I'm always right...I'm always right!' does not seem to be working with so many voters.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
we are hearing on the news about the possibilty of Woolworths going into administration. Is this not a sympton of the current economic crisis, which Darling hopes to solve with his emergency budget, rather than a pre-budget report.
How do stores work, they borrow money from the banks to enable them to purchase goods which they then sell for a profit. The banks lend them money on the basis that the loans can be repaid.
In the meantime the suppliers of the goods give the stores the goods to be sold in return for the money which the stores receive when they sell the goods to the public.
Now this is very simple.
Only problem is that with the internet there really is no need for the stores anymore. They have had their day. What I do when I want to buy a camera is to go to my retailer, get all the gen on the product, which is the best has the highest specification etc, then say thank you very much, then go on to the internet and buy it directly from the producer.
Just thought I would tell you this so that Gordon Brown does not live in ignorance of the real world, you know like Gordon Brown not knowing that there was a shadow banking system. There is a shadow shopping suystem as well as something called the black economy.
Complain about this comment
226 maxsceptic
"Of course there's no point arguing with someone who's right ;-)"
Exactly! so I've saved you the trouble ;-)
"I know that you did not refer my original post.
We all know who did. "
Oh dear! I would tone it down a bit if I were you. You're making Darth Vader seem subtle in comparison.
Complain about this comment
#224. The answer to your question is that anyone being attacked in the circumstances you describe is entitled to use reasonable force to defend themselves. Should the circumstances warrant (say your life is in clear danger, as it could be with the postulated use of a knife) this can include seriously injuring or killing the attackers.
The social and economic background of the hypothetical attackers is not relevant.
NB: just to be clear, in your hypothetical example, you are only entitled to defend yourself from the actual attackers. You cannot, for example, take it on yourself to beat up a few passers by or bystanders or anyone else who is not either attacking you or actively assisting others to attack you.
Please note that I have answered your question and I will note that you have declined to answer mine.
Complain about this comment
206. grandantidote wrote
I make no claim to have any knowledge of economics
Yet you constantly and blindly back Browns record, and no doubt also back his recovery plan. You turn a blind eye to all the waste and squander from the last decade.
I wonder why.
1 Me Dad always voted Labour.
2 Ive always voted Labour.
3 I could never vote Tory after Thatcher.
Perhaps its all of the above.
I think thinking like that verges on terrorism
Well it terrifies me.
Complain about this comment
why is that de Menezes was shot,
Perhaps if people had followed orders this unfortunate man would not have been shot.
He was illegally in this country, pretending to be a student, on a student's visa.
No he wasn't he was in the country legally having come in through Eire . He was not an illegal immigrant, he didn't jump any barriers and he hadn't raped any one. All these myths have been promulgated since his death and they are all false.
Complain about this comment
#229
You are of course quite right. But what if peoples (unwritten) orders are that they should not deport people who outstay their Visas. What if everybody is told not to follow the rules.
I do understand your position. However, think about what you have written.
One 'rule' is that if a woman says no to having sex with a man then she means no. But if she does not say no then that is ok, even though the man has got her drunk or persuaded her to take drugs. So, you will agree that it is not quite so simple as following rules.
It is the same with Smith and her new rules on prostitution. If a man asks a woman are you doing this sex act with me as a free person or are you being forced to do this. Well the woman says I am free to do this, and the pair then have intercourse. Now, it transpires that the woman was not free, that she had been trafficked illegally into the country. The man apparently will be guilty of rape. Should the woman be forced to carry an ID card, so that the man can verify her situation.
Of course if everybody does their job then there will never be a problem, but I ask is Gordon doing his job. Because if he is then he has an awful lot of blood on his hands.
Complain about this comment
199. phoenixarisenq wrote:
You say:
Unfortunately, when dealing with terrorists, the legal rules of engagement cannot apply.
A few questions for you:
If the normal rules of engagement dont apply and the rule of law in that particular area need not be adhered to:
How is it decided that a target is a terrorist
Who makes this decision on behalf of society.
What criteria do these people have to comply with in order to establish that the person is a terrorist.
What targets are acceptable to wipe out with a missile if a terrorist suspect is sheltering within.
1 His family home
2 Someone elses home
3 A community centre
4 A hospital
5 A church or mosque
6 A school
Just interested to hear your rules of engagement.
Everyone has them, even terrorists.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
237. , CarrotsneedaQUANGO2
What targets are acceptable to wipe out with a missile if a terrorist suspect is sheltering within.
1 His family home
2 Someone elses home
3 A community centre
4 A hospital
5 A church or mosque
6 A school
Just interested to hear your rules of engagement
These are terrible questions to reply to. If I was a terrorist, there would be no conflict in my mind, because only the destruction of the perceived enemy would be the goal. As a fairly 'civilised' humanbeing I am unhappy to kill or maim innocent people. I would try and consider what caused the greatest danger to my country as a whole, i.e. leaving the terrorists where they were or going in and killing them and perhaps killing innocent people too. I'd aim for minimum destruction, wherever possible. Advance warning of an attack would be given, and then if the terorists still sheltered behind schoolchildren, or an 'innocent' target such as family home, mosque, school, etc. then they would be ultimately responsible. I believe that the fundamentalists present a real danger to Britain, and should be contained within Pakistan's borders. If nobody stops them they will spread and destroy western civilisation.
armagediontimes Forgive me. Which question remains unanswered? I will do my best to respond this evening.
Complain about this comment
A government who tries to spend our way out of a recession is like an alcoholic who tries to drink his way out of alcoholism.
Complain about this comment
"Cancelling planned tax rises - on cars, small business and income tax allowances"
I'm already depressed before I hear AD speak tomrrow about the budget if the above comment is true. If Labour are going to hand us tax cuts by way of not increasing taxes, they can afford to give us back a very great deal indeed.
I think this whole tax cutting venture stinks. The actual difference to the econony the government will make by cutting taxes and increasing tax credits will be extremely small, it will certainly not be kicking anything into action. Shops will bring down prices much more effectively in their sales than a small decrease in VAT.
I expect any tax decreases to be very poorly targeted - Labour generally get this wrong - and will be practiically insignificant.
I do think the exercise is all about grooming the population for the general election - whenever it comes. Labour will be able to stand up and say how much they did to cut taxes and help people in need. They will say little about how they sat back and allowed the economy to slide so far.
I think that Vince Cable again gets it right in what he thinks should be done, in particular pushing for social housing - which would actually help the situation a great deal. But I doubt that AD will go down that route. As I said, I think this is all window dessing for future use.
The view that we will all be in for a tax hike "in the medium term" is clearly true. So those the goverment are now relying on to spend will later have their little windfall removed - a very cruel gesture.
What both Labour and the Conservatives do is protect the wealthy, if anyone ever tries to say that the wealthy could pay a bit more tax, then a chorus goes up that they will all leave the country. We also hear that it is hardly fair to tax those who create the wealth. This is nonsense.
Wealth is created by moving money from one hand to another. Those making money are dependant on those buying their goods, so there is a good reason to share out the wealth via taxation to level out the wealth a bit.
It makes no sense to me for a government to expect those least well off to go out and spend money so that we can have millionaires ducking their social responsibilities.
Cameron is relying on Osborne to steer a new route while Osborne is asleep at the wheel, and Camern can't see it.
Complain about this comment
#237
A few questions for you:
If the normal rules of engagement dont apply and the rule of law in that particular area need not be adhered to:
How is it decided that a target is a terrorist
Who makes this decision on behalf of society.
What criteria do these people have to comply with in order to establish that the person is a terrorist.
-------------------------------------
There goes my afternoon snooze!
A target is recognised as a terrorist by the acts it does, i.e. killing, kidnapping, spreading terror.
The decision to classify a group or individual as a terrorist is decided by the head of state, e.g. government.
The criteria that have to be complied with to establish that a person/group are terrorists is to show they (or he/she) is causing all of teh above, i.e. killing, kidnapping, spreading terror.
Do my answers satisfy you? Trying to clarify as best I can.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps now would be a good time for the government to take out a new mortgage on the country?
Complain about this comment
30. jrperry.
"The shop itself is ultimately German-owned
The shop assistant is Czech and sends all his spare money to his family in Prague
So, my question is, how does this "stimulus" help the British economy?"
A very good run down list of why the British economy IS run down, most of which you can do nothing about.
However, you could chose to buy your televison from a small British shop (employing British people)
My son owns just such a shop which he started from scratch, and he also sells on the internet.....but of course I couldn't possibly get the name of his shop passed the mods
Complain about this comment
236. T A Griffin (TAG)
Hi TAG,
Actually I think Jaqui Smith is bonkers and unfit for use. I'm against prostitution, personally, but that's beside the point. How on earth can a man verify a woman is a free agent, selling herself without a 'manager' (I use that word, because I'm afraid the search engine would moderate this blog if I used the correct term) I can't see a woman saying "I am a slave, I have no rights." so it shows how silly Smith is. It's heartbreaking, but I can't see this government being any different from previous ones, of any political shade, and rescuing these poor souls.
The question of women calling "rape" is a tricky one. They are silly fools drinking too much and leading men on, but fortunately I've kept away from such siruations. I will let more "worldly" people respond.
Complain about this comment
#241
Nice!
Complain about this comment
235.
why is that de Menezes was shot,
Perhaps if people had followed orders this unfortunate man would not have been shot.
He was illegally in this country, pretending to be a student, on a student's visa.
No he wasn't he was in the country legally having come in through Eire . He was not an illegal immigrant, he didn't jump any barriers and he hadn't raped any one. All these myths have been promulgated since his death and they are all false.
-------------------------------------------------
Oh, I've opened a can of worms. As I wrote just now, there goes my afternoon snooze. Brought it on myself.
For a simple country lad, de Menezes appears remarkably savvy in the ways to work the system. Denied a work permit to the US, his first choice, he discovered how coming through Eire he could gain an extra three months in the UK. Of course he was not a rapist, but neither was he a martyr. This country was still in the throes of being subjected to horrible terrorist attacks and naturally everyone was on edge. It seems sometimes that the police are in a no-win situation. Damned if they do, and damned if they don't.
It sounds cruel to state this, but my opinion is that people have exploited this tragedy for political means. His family, poor and uneducated have been able to travel backwards and forwards and these journeys and day to day expenses are being paid for by money they couldnot possibly have earned.
Complain about this comment
Cynicalsadie #241: Governments spending their way out of recession are like alcoholics drinking their way out of alcoholism.
I'm afraid this is totally untrue and misguided. I attach a recent article from FT economics columnist Samuel Brittan (hardly a socialist!) laying out pretty clearly why you are wrong.
The summary statement is: "Maxims about debt that might be prudent for families can be the height of folly for governments". (The world economy is still not Mrs Thatcher's corner shop in Grantham. Actually rather less so.)
The Conservative policy of not borrowing substantially more when faced with the worst recession for eighty years absolutely beggars belief. Personally I cannot believe that intelligent people such as Cameron and Osborne actually believe it is an appropriate policy. It is so ludicrous.
I can only assume that (a) they know that Labour will sensibly boost the economy anyway so can afford to oppose it on political grounds; and (b) the political grounds are a decision to fight the next election on the Daily Mail agenda of scaring the middle classes about taxes.
Anyway, if you are not convinced by me on the economics, read Brittan. It's pretty clear.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a0b384ea-9612-11dd-9dce-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Complain about this comment
To armagediontimes
I am ready to answer your question, but I can't find it, and have written so many posts and replies I'm confused! Please forgive me and let me know what you want me to reply to.
Complain about this comment
#243 There is no need for you to be diverted from your afternoon nap by making up your own definition of terrorism.
US law already provides a perfectly cogent definition. It is
"Terror is the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to attain political or religious ideological goals through intimidation, coercion, or instilling fear."
Therefore a target is a terrorist if it is engaging in any of the actions described.
However you need to be careful in how you respond to terrorism and terrorists. Some of the actions that you express yourself ready to contemplate in post #240 would, if acted upon, mean that the perpetrator of these actions would also meet the definition for being considered a terrorist.
A proper response to terrorism is to act within the law - i.e. gather evidence, locate and arrest the terrorists, bring them to trial, and if found guilty imprison them.
A proper response is clearly not to respond with your own terrorist attacks.
My original question to you was a request that you identify the law that permits the US to engage in bombings or targeted assassinations inside the borders of Pakistan.
Complain about this comment
TAG 231
Total agree the High Street has to change.Bought four books at a price well below high street delivered free and here in rural Wales next day. Saved a round trip of 44 miles to nearest bookshop. According to the van driver had 85 deliveries that day in the local area just think if every one was making a trip to the nearest big town how man green miles have we saved.
Yes the cost of petrol has made us change our habits, and once in to a new way and you realise its much better than it is, will I go back to spending in the high st ..NO
Vince Cable has been since the Northern Rock a fiasco a breath of fresh air, pity he's the only one in his party that I would vote for. How about a football type transfer to get him into government with either of the big two. With all the money sloshing around could be a good investment.
Complain about this comment
251.armagediontimes
Thanks for taking the trouble to respond.
My original question to you was a request that you identify the law that permits the US to engage in bombings or targeted assassinations inside the borders of Pakistan.
I am not qualified to respond because I do not know the answer. I could summise, but that would be as bad as the spin put out by those who are so against any action against terror.
I believe, and this is only a personal assumption, that the US is trying to avoid an escalation of terrorism and is trying to contain it within limited areas.
I'm sorry my reply is so meagre, but like most bloggers I am not in possession of official information, have no military qualifications, and am only attempting to state my considered views. I have the feeling that we are at opposite poles in the present discussion, and we see the problem through different eyes.
Complain about this comment
251.
A proper response to terrorism is to act within the law - i.e. gather evidence, locate and arrest the terrorists, bring them to trial, and if found guilty imprison them.
Forgot to mention this: How could the US or any other democratic country arrest the terorists, bring them to trial etc? I don't think the terrorists would have been intimidated if somebody had marched up and said, "Excuse me, old boy, would you kindly accompany me to the nearest lockup?"
Complain about this comment
#251
Refer to my earlier comments.
Go to the International Herald Tribune for 11th November.
Headline 'Order lets US strike at A Qaeda worldwide'.
The attacks are authorised by a classified order that Defense Secretary Donal Rumsfeld signed in the spring of 2004 at the direction of President George W Bush.
I can give you more informatiuon if you like, just ask. There is no injunction preventing publication any of this information. Be afraid, very afraid.
Complain about this comment
All hail the great leader
So regarding the Northern Rock bail out - Gordon told a few porkies and looks to have lost at least 3 billion of tax payers money.
I wonder what porkies Gordon has up his sleeve with the "fiscal stimulus" (A.K.A risky election bribe given our debt levels).
Gordon's gambles with our money just get bigger and bigger. It is frightening to think how much money he is capable of blowing before 2010.....
Brown's ego is so vast, he would hate to get the boot and remain in the history books as an "unelected PM". He is more than prepared to throw billions more down the drain in order to bribe the public to elect him.
Complain about this comment
#253
Sounds to me like an excuse as used by some Germans at the end of WWII. I didn't know what was going on, I couldn't be bothered to find out and I wasn't affected so I don't see what the problem is.
Thousands of women and children have been killed in Aghanistan and Iraq. It is part of the job of an occupying force to protect the local population, we with our American allies have manifestly failed in that role.
We have allowed hundreds, if not thousands to be tortured and killed. Not all illegal activity took place in Cuba, it happened all over the world. Britain has been complicit in this, and it has been officially accepted by the Foreign Secretary although you may have chosen to ignore the comment with regard to Diego Garcia.
We have had the deaths of de Menezes and Doctor David Kelly. We have had the courts martials of soldiers for crimes, most of these charges have been found to have been not proven, even with the evidence of a dead person being found to have been roundly beaten, by whom, did he beat himself up to the point where he died.
We are as guilty as America because we have detained some of the prisoners who have been handed over to be tortured, referred to as extra-ordinary rendition. The ends do not justify the means, we must go through due process of law.
We are no different to the terrorists by our actions, and Gordon Brown, oh he feels angry with the banks. I feel angry with Gordon Brown, the banks, nor bankers, do not, as far as I know, kill people. Soldiers, and the mercenaries who work for the private contractors as security, do!
Complain about this comment
It was noticeable on Andrew Marr's show this morning that Mandy when asked about Labour's plans to save the economy mentioned the word Conservatives 3 times in his opening few sentences. I therefore concur with the blogger who observed a few threads ago that his premier line of fiscal reasoning this morning was to attack The Opposition Party. As far as spending and borrowing are concerned how can you trust a group of politicians who waste 200 million pounds on failed IT schemes as emerged today. That is just one isolated example of the many hundreds of millions of taxpayer's money which have disappeared down a deep, dark hole over the past 10 years.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes @251 wrote:
"My original question to you was a request that you identify the law that permits the US to engage in bombings or targeted assassinations inside the borders of Pakistan."
Answer: The US sensibly decides what is in its best security interests and acts accordingly.
If these security interests conflict with 'international law' then it ignores them.
I do wish the British government would also act likewise, and consider the security of the British people and British interests as its paramount concern.
Complain about this comment
214 Tag yes you quite right but it doesn't alter the gist of the debate, does it.
Complain about this comment
#236
Interesting that prostitution has been raised. I think the political parties are missing a point here. If this business was legalised and correctly legislated, what with income tax and VAT the Treasury would have an excellent new tax stream. The country could be put back on its feet again without borrowing and without tax increases.
The girls can be managed safely, their customers can relax that they are not getting criminalised. That should appeal to both Labour and Tory.
Ozzy, I think you've just been given a way of balancing the books when you get into power. I don't even mind if you steal my idea either.
Complain about this comment
Wow! VAT down by a whole 2.5%!!!
I think I'll rush off and by that expensive super-duper HD plasma screen BlueRay Home Cinema Complex at GBP 1,150 rather than GBP 1,175 - saving me the grand sum oftwenty five pounds!
On second thoughts, I'd do better to save my money and watch my perfectly good 5 years old system.
This measure is as likely to stimulate the market as a prod with a sharp pencil will stimulate the stiff corpse of a road-kill badger.
Next stupid idea, please!
Complain about this comment
artisticsocrates @261,
Ooh-eer Missus! That would certainly stimulate the economy.....
Complain about this comment
Jonathan Cook #256: The massive gamble in our present global crisis would be to NOT undertake a major fiscal stimulus (along with other measures such as partial nationalisations and recapitalisations). That would be the gamble of sitting on our hands and hoping that we will somehow avoid deep slump and even systemic collapse without actually doing anything.
The only politicians in the Western world that I am aware of who are promoting this gamble are the British Conservatives. Everyone else, and virtually all mainstream economists, are promoting various forms of major state intervention and stimulus. After all, we are facing the worst economic crisis for eighty years.
I do wonder why the Conservatives have decided to revert to stupidity (after I must grant a few years of relative lucidity). Since I am a leftist I would only be speculating. Perhaps some bloggers on here can enlighten us all?
Complain about this comment
I'm pretty sure some of the policy positions the Tories take and a lot of the negative emotional subtext is just blah. They're only saying it to get into power and win popularity. It's typical opportunism and negative campaigning. Again, you get a lot of that around here from the wannabes.
David Cameron sold himself on being a Christian and having marketing skills, and the guy has near zero morality and markets stuff like some office junior sent on a box ticking course. The more he's tried to look like a leader the more he's hollowed himself out. It's a clear case of overstretch.
Looking at the Tories collapsing polls, he'd be better off spending more time on constructing useful policies and addressing the Tories internal issues than having a go at Labour or trying to win an election that hasn't been called. I doubt he or his party will listen. People rarely do.
Complain about this comment
257. At 6:35pm on 23 Nov 2008, T A Griffin (TAG) wrote:
#253
Sounds to me like an excuse as used by some Germans at the end of WWII. I didn't know what was going on, I couldn't be bothered to find out and I wasn't affected so I don't see what the problem is.
I find your response both glib and hurtful. Unlike you, who seems to set himself up as an all righteous, all knowing paragon of truth, I admit to ignorance on many aspects of this problem. You appear to forgive Great Britain and the United States nothing, whilst continually sparing what mercy you have for peoples who would be only too happy to destroy us all.
Unlike the Germans at the end of WWII, I know something is going on, I know nobody is perfect, but unlike the MAJORITY of Germans at that time. I am very concerned to find out. What I have so far ascertained is we are facing an enemy which is highly dangerous and grows more malignant as time passes. I only wish we had a strong,defiant military policy here, much like that of the US, which would put our people first. That is my view, and nothing will change it. You worry about the Iraqis, I'm more concerned about the people here at home.
Complain about this comment
#259
May I say that those might be your thoughts but my son was in the army and he sign-up to defend Queen and Country. This he did with great courage and bravery. However, he did not sign-up for American Foreign Policy and so was given an honourable discharge from the army. Not because he was a conscientous objector, but you do not kill people based on a lie, nor for an American President.
You might, and others might do so as well, kill innocents based on a lie, but there comes a time in all our lives when you have to make a decision based on your moral beliefs, my son did that. Gordon Brown, I am ashamed to say did not, and will not. He should have resigned over Iraq, the war would then not have happened, he shamefully went along with it so as to keep his job. That is why I hold him and other members of the government with such total contempt, they are the old contemptibles of today.
Complain about this comment
219armagedion, terrrorists in my opinion should be treated like rabid rats and should be destroyed by every means possible if they are innocent let them face the courts they don't care about borders so why should we.
I am normally against capital punishment and if he was arrested then I would demand a fair trial and if guilty a very long sentence. but if a so called man or woman can wipe out scores of innocent people without a ounce of compassion and then run and hide until they get the opportunity to repeat the act then they have to be stopped by any means possible.
Complain about this comment
The main plan of his recovery plan according to the pundits seesm to be a 2.5% reduction in VAT.
Does he seriously think that this is going to entice shoppers into the High Street.My wife isnt interested in buying these days unless there is a reduction of at least 25% so even the Marks and Spencers sale of 20% didnt shift her last week.
Your BBC news today says you can get nearly £500 off a Mondeo.So what dealers are already offering nearly 10 times that amount and they cant get people to buy.
This plan is already bound to fail as it not addressing the problem.That is to save jobs in small businesses and getting the banks to lend again.
Until he does that nothing is going to move and in the meantime his drop of 2.5% in VAT will be wiped out by the goods that are imported and priced in dollars going up as the pound weakens further as the market looses faith in Labour and is failed policies..
regards malc
Complain about this comment
Nick,
I live in Exeter and my local labour MP is Ben Bradshaw. Now then Exeter schools were in a terrible state and Ben made representations to get all five rebuilt under the PFI scheme and the contracts were given to Mowlem, who subsequently went out of business. The capital cost was about GBP98 million, but the cost over the the twenty five years will be GBPabout 310 million.
We also had a football club, Exeter City, which went into administration with massive debts. Now then our Ben also made representation to the Inland Revenue to have the club's debt either massively reduced or written off completely. This is an appalling state of affairs. The inland revenue should not have allowed this debt to accumulate and it should not have been treated in the way that it was. It was done to give our MP a good feel to the electorate.
We have always to look at what an MP does in his constituency. I regard this type of affair as what I would call pork barrel politics.
Complain about this comment
Looking at the Tories collapsing polls..."
Or perhaps not.
Complain about this comment
So VAT is being reduced by from 17.5 to 15.0% money on Labour saying a 14% decrease in VAT. Wait for the spin
The Conservative lost power due to the "poll tax" which was a fair tax in that we all paid for what we got in services but lost power as it was seen by as an unfair Tax.
VAT taxes the poor more than the rich as the % of earned income spent on essentials is far greater than for the less well off.
Gas, Electricity, Petrol, are all essential don't just reduce get rid of it.
Complain about this comment
268:
I don't normally see things in the same light as you do but in this particular instance being a frequent air traveller and a great rspecter of human life I totally agree with your sentiments. 'No quarter given none taken.'
Complain about this comment
#269 grandantidote
"but if a so called man or woman can wipe out scores of innocent people without a ounce of compassion and then run and hide until they get the opportunity to repeat the act then they have to be stopped by any means possible."
Excuse me, are you calling for the assassination of George Bush?
Complain about this comment
Nick,
as far as I know the government has bailed out RBS or Royal Bank of Scotland as it was known. They are the bank which is following the government attitude towards loans.
As far as I know neither HSBC nor Barclays has taken any money from the government. The only other high street bank is LloydsTSB, the TSB standing for Trustees Savings Bank sold off by the Conservatives.
Can somebody who is not insane please let me know why either HSBC or Barclays should do anything under the instructions of the government. What further measures will be taken against them by a vindictive Prime Minister. Surely they are international banks of very high standing and any idea that they should make commercial decisions based on a government, which will not be in power for very much longer, should be of concern to any sane individual.
Complain about this comment
271:
I think he is probably referring to the drop from a 20+ points lead although it still doesn't look too good for his man but it's not over until the fat lady sings as they say! When the financial pips begin to squeak and Monday's measures prove to be a drop in the ocean of what is required the polls should veer once again towards a healthier position for DC. With boundary changes as they are the lead has to be fairly reasonable to equate to any decent majority in The Commons.
Complain about this comment
Tomorrow afternoon Labour finally get a chance to put forward "the longest suicide note in history" for the nation after which we can fast forward to a day in 2021 when David Cameron at the end of his 11 years in office will be able to stand up in the Commons to make history repeat itself:-
Eleven years ago, we rescued Britain from the parlous state to which socialism had brought it. I remind the House that, under socialism, this country had come to such a pass that [ Nicholas Henderson ] one of our most able and distinguished ambassadors felt compelled to write in a famous dispatch, a copy of which found its way into The Economist, the following words:
"We talk of ourselves without shame as being one of the less prosperous countries of Europe. The prognosis for the foreseeable future"
,
he said in 1979, was "discouraging".
Conservative government has changed all that. Once again, Britain stands tall in the councils of Europe and of the world, and our policies have brought unparalleled prosperity to our citizens at home.
Yes, our companies have the freedom and talent to succeed, and the will to compete. And compete we must. Our competitors will not be taking a break. There must be no hankering after soft options and no going back to the disastrous economic policies of Labour Governments. No amount of distance lends enchantment to the lean years of Labour, which gave us the lowest growth rate in Europe, the highest strike record and, for the average family, virtually no increase in take-home pay. Labour's policies are a vote of no confidence in the ability of British people to manage their own affairs. We have that confidence. Confidence in freedom and confidence in enterprise. That is what divides Conservatives from socialists.
Our stewardship of the public finances has been better than that of any Government for nearly 50 years. It has enabled us to repay debt and cut taxes. The resulting success of the private sector has generated the wealth and revenues which pay for better social services?to double the amount being spent to help the disabled, to give extra help to war widows, and vastly to increase spending on the national health service. More than 1 million more patients are being treated each year and there are 8,000 more doctors and 53,000 more nurses to treat them.
Complain about this comment
267. T A Griffin (TAG)
That is why I hold him and other members of the government with such total contempt, they are the old contemptibles of today.
---------------------------------------------
I'm packing up for today.
Just one thing, no politicians of any party can hold a candle to those brave, unlikely true heroes of 1914, so don't even mention them in the same breath.
Goodnight and a peaceful night.
Complain about this comment
I just watched the Politics Show Interview.
Fair play to Jon Sopel. He 'actually' asked the PM some of the questions other journalists allow Brown to dodge!!
Brown's spin remains the same - it was the Americans, it wasn'ae me, telling lies that the Conservatives would do nothing and trying to imply that all countries are following his master plan.
At least Brown had the grace to glow red when he was telling lies on the big points.
If you can't be bothered to watch - then Brown's face glowed red when:
- He tried to dodge the impact of his forthcoming tax bombshell
- He was spouting guff, rather than admit he was wrong to say "no more boom and bust".
Complain about this comment
If the Government is a woman and the Economy is a man and to stay in in wedded bliss they must assert their love for one another tomorrow, I cant help but feel that a fake orgasm is about to occur
Complain about this comment
274. At 7:27pm on 23 Nov 2008, JewsNunkie wrote:
#269 grandantidote
"but if a so called man or woman can wipe out scores of innocent people without a ounce of compassion and then run and hide until they get the opportunity to repeat the act then they have to be stopped by any means possible."
Excuse me, are you calling for the assassination of George Bush?
WAS TURNING OFF THE COMPUTER AND SAW THIS STUPID POSTING. YOU EXCEED YOUR USUAL ASININE SELF. NOT FUNNY!
Complain about this comment
#181
This goverment has done all sorts of incentives to get people back to work but the long and the short of it there has been too much carrot and not enough stick. Over 2 million people on bisability benefits, this is unfair on the genuine claimants, a million of these are spongers, who have no intention of working, as a taxpayer earning less than £25,000 I am sick of subsidising these wasters.
Complain about this comment
It is pathetic that the best an experienced PR man like Cameron can do - is regurgitate an old slogan 'Tax Bombshell' from the 1990s - is that really the best he can do?
God help you poor rabid angry tories.....
'Tax Con' which he chants religously is very weak.
A pity he does not have any coherent policies to talk about.
Bill
Complain about this comment
#278
Is there not a problem because of the way we are manipulated in respect of the Great War. The 'Old Contemptibles' were soldiers who went to war under orders. There was absolutely no need for Britain to enter into the war. It was absolutely none of our business. We were the first to mobilise, Churchill and the non-dispersal of the Navy after a review.
We somehow managed to mobilise an army to go to France so quickly after the war was declared, almost a Dunkirk in reverse, yet this was meant to have been a war which came from nowhere.
Of course we must not forget that the British army was ready to mutiny in Dublin over Irish freedom. We had the war mongerers on the streets stoking up pressure for war.
We had agreements where we would send the Navy to protect the coast of northern France because the French navy was meant to look after our interests in the Mediterranean. It was Churchill who put in place the blockade of Germany after he had seen how it had worked in the American civil war.
The 'Old Contemptibles' should not even have been sent to the war, it was because we got involved that the Great War went on as long as it did. It would have been over by christmas if it wasn't for us. Only trouble is was that Germany would probably have won, and we couldn't have that could we. Especially with their allies the Turks, how different would the middle east be today!
Complain about this comment
#253 I think you will find that you cannot answer the question because there is no law that authorises the US (or any other foreign military power) to conduct operations inside Pakistan.
The United Nations provides a forum through which such authorisation could be obtained, but no such authorisation has been sought much less obtained.
#254 Your argument is ridiculous - just because people resist arrest does not mean that you do not or cannot arrest them.
#255 What you say is true but misses the point. Except in specific cases US law does not have extra territorial jurisdiction. The US has no legal right to unilaterally legalise an assault on a foreign country. If I burgle your house I cannot claim a defence that I was authorised to do so by myself.
#259 You are correct - the US chooses to ignore the law and acts illegally as and when it chooses to do so.
It is interesting to note that you express an explicit desire that the British state should become a criminal state.
You justify this urge toward criminality on the claim that it will enhance the security of the British people.
It would appear non controversial to argue that precisely the opposite is the case. Any descent into barbarism and criminality is certain to reduce security for us all.
If you stop and think about you may realise that your responses are precisely the responses that the terrorists are hoping to provoke.
If you think the US has the right to ignore the law then why should that right be denied to anyone else. If it is right that the US ignores laws then why is it wrong if Al-Qeada also chooses to ignore laws?
#268 - You consider terrorists to be rabid rats who should be destroyed by every means possible. Is this all terrorists, or just some terrorists?
The US itself has been convicted by the World Court of the "unlawful use of force" (which means international terrorism) with regard to its activities in Nicaragua in the 1980´s
If you apply your thinking to this example then you may be surprised to discover just how much you have in common with those you regard as "rabid rats."
Complain about this comment
''281. At 7:42pm on 23 Nov 2008, phoenixarisenq wrote: about 274 on 269
Excuse me, are you calling for the assassination of George Bush?
WAS TURNING OFF THE COMPUTER AND SAW THIS STUPID POSTING. YOU EXCEED YOUR USUAL ASININE SELF. NOT FUNNY!''
The assassination of any leader is usually called upon their actions being a direct threat to the viability of anti-(localised) terrorist actions or individuals assuming they are greater than god.
Therefore, the aforementioned Bush is more likely to to be kept alive by all means by intended foes and to reap his infidelity in history than end it and lessen their propoganda
Complain about this comment
240. phoenixarisenq
Thats a very nice warm wooly answer and I hear you and perhaps if you and I were in charge all the right decisions would be made.
HOWEVER, given that we have to empower others probably in CIA sections all over the globe please return to my questions in 237 and outline exactly how any state would implement your policy.
We need rules of engagement, if we dont then any official or officer authorised to launch a missile can do so without fear.
So please outline your specific rules so we can be clear here. After we dont want missiles falling on our houses or our childrens schools do we.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
over Baby P David Cameron was visibly angry, not only over the tragedy but also because of the reaction from the Prime Minister. So now we know that the PM does do emotion, therefore he cannot be an Aspidistra.
Now we hear from the great man himself that he too is angry, only not over a baby but because the banks are not doing as they are told. The man is pathetic.
Furthermore, I wonder if anybody will tell me how many British soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since the very quiet visit of President Karsai of Afghanistan. Do you think that an agreement was reached which will mean that Britain will not participate in the American Obama surge in that country. In return? Britain will allow it's special forces to operate on the Pakistan border, and we will also spend millions on giving money to the local war lords to be quiet so that we can slowly withdraw with the usual ignominy, just like our defeat in Iraq.
Finally, let us hope that the PM does not bring his sombre mood to the commons on wednesday by giving us the stuff about the loss of the Irish police, they died serving their country etc... because he did not mention the soldiers serving in Afghanistan last week, so hopefully the whole charade will now cease. I wait for wednesday with interest.
Complain about this comment
Labour has provided unprecedented policy and campaign support to the American Democrats and Japan's LDP. Obama needs gravitas and Japan wants a seat at the top table. That's a favour they'll be wanting to pay back.
Looks like we got us a convoy.
Complain about this comment
287. , CarrotsneedaQUANGO2 wrote:
240. phoenixarisenq
Thats a very nice warm wooly answer and I hear you and perhaps if you and I were in charge all the right decisions would be made.
HOWEVER, given that we have to empower others probably in CIA sections all over the globe please return to my questions in 237 and outline exactly how any state would implement your policy.
We need rules of engagement, if we dont then any official or officer authorised to launch a missile can do so without fear.
So please outline your specific rules so we can be clear here. After we dont want missiles falling on our houses or our childrens schools do we.
=============================
When dealing with terrorists, it is impossible to set binding rules of engagement. Terrorists will attack schools, hospitals, and any easy target. Despite claiming to be suicide bombers, they will preferably go for the soft option, although if there is no alternative they will engage in action with armed forces.
Another problem is they are far better at PR than Great Britain or the USA. They know how to press all the right buttons, show wedding parties killed by air raids, forgetting to mention that the premises were used as terrorist headquarters! They play upon the emotions of people in the West, who mistakenly feel guilt because they have food in their bellies and clothes on their backs.
What specific rules can I outline? Dreadful question which far abler minds than mine can never solve. We cannot say don't fire on hospitals, for example, because they won't take a darned bit of notice. You cannot reason with the devil, and these are the closest we will ever get to pure evil here on earth. In the end, my answer will evoke outrage, it must be - just hit them harder than they can hit us, and keep hitting. This wont rid of us of them, but it will allow for periods of comparative quiet, perhaps until a genius comes up with a true answer.
Complain about this comment
279
I agree with you. Jon Sopel gave a vigorous interview with GB which made a refreshing change from the usual BBC interviews with Labour MPs.
You forgot to mention that GB also had the grace to glow red on some minor points such as the observation that he has never appeared so happy and confident since the economic crisis took hold. He blustered out some sort of denial but he looked as though he had been caught off guard. Still, he managed to keep a straight face when he accused the Tories of doing nothing to help families and small businesses. This is a lie. The Tories have said they want to cut public spending in order to help families and small businesses.
In contrast to his blushes his pallid face at the end of the interview was classic. He was glowering with resentment. I don't think he was expecting such a probing interview.
Great interview. Well done Jon.
Complain about this comment
Nick I was just watching Osnorne on the news taken from one of the shows this morning he looked as if he was going to bare his teeth and plunge them into some ones neck.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes @285,
There is a clash of civilisations between radical Islam and the West.
Whether or not you choose to acknowledge it, like it, or ignore it, that's the way things are.
If we don't destroy Islamism, then it will continue to attempt to destroy us - and if we falter, it will prevail.
Complain about this comment
292. At 9:10pm on 23 Nov 2008, grandantidote wrote:
Nick I was just watching Osnorne on the news taken from one of the shows this morning he looked as if he was going to bare his teeth and plunge them into some ones neck.
----------------------------------------------------
I don't believe it! The last Leader of the Tories had something of the night about him - Dracula - but now another one ? I think Osborne is far closer to that horrid schoolboy Flashman.
I had planned an early night, but after being called a terrorist and being compared with the Germans after World War II I'm all shook up. Only joking, I'm made of sterner stuff.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown spent most of his political career behind a desk and fielding bullshit and attitude isn't something he was geared up to deal with in the past.
The pro-Tory mob were denying Cameron said spending cuts when that's exactly what he meant, so thanks for confirming that.
I'd like to see some of the mouths hiding behind the wall of internet anonymity perform in a live situation, and explain cutbacks and holes in the road.
TAG has lost perspective. What he doesn't get is the idea of character and how things get passed around. The terrorist games the system and is a negative influence. This disrupts and upsets, gets attention, and takes effort away from developing capital. In becoming obsessive and hateful he's been directed and manipulated into a carbon copy of a terrorist. Every time he opens his mouth he fires a bullet for Osama Bin Laden. This just adds to the wheel of misery and puts off the moment of enlightenment even further.
It's said that the best response to a movie is to make another movie. Simply, one can disrespect a work or posture but it neither adds or takes away. Instead of investing broken mind and attitude into an ever increasing pile of funk one sidesteps the whole issue and builds a better alternative, though it's possible this "better" alternative isn't anything more than just another wheeze. Hence, a Zen Buddist saying that you aren't defined by what you do but what you let go of.
I've commented on this before but this economic difficulty is no different. People and the world are the same the day before it happened as they are after. Money is only a notional thing. what really matters is how people perceive the world. If they obsess about collapsing balance sheets and market hysteria they'll find what they're looking for. Sometimes, a little reminder of a better alternative or "fiscal stimulus" can help get peoples attention in a more useful way.
Complain about this comment
NorthernThatcherite: I have to say I REALLY enjoyed your Pythonesque #277. Quite brilliant!
After the global capitalist financial system would have completely collapsed but for massive government intervention (probably the same will soon be true of the US automotive industry), your joke that Cameron would be rescuing us from 'socialism' - it must be the way you tell them!
To be honest, I have to admit that for a moment I thought this wasn't a fabulous joke but you might just be serious. But then I realised that no-one of sound mind could possibly in 2008 be proclaiming that Thatecherite capitalism was about to rescue the world from the evils of socialism.
So thanks again for the laughs! Keep it up!
Complain about this comment
Billmcfadden wrote:
It is pathetic that the best an experienced PR man like Cameron can do - is regurgitate an old slogan 'Tax Bombshell' from the 1990s - is that really the best he can do?
God help you poor rabid angry tories.....
'Tax Con' which he chants religously is very weak.
A pity he does not have any coherent policies to talk about.
Bill
Actually I think it is a pretty powerful statement as it links Gordon Brown and New Labour to Old Labour who were political poison for a decade.
The last thing that New Labour would want is for the general public to look at the mess that was left the last time Labour were in power and associate it with modern Labour.
Complain about this comment
do these blogs not proove my point talk talk talk is all the great british public will do but act well they leave it untill its too late.
has the years of torement under a government that has shown they are not interested in the people they were contracted to represent just themselves and there media image weakened the populations resolve so much.
have the likes of brown and blair turned us all into sheep ???
i can only hope not becouse if they have we may as well start learning a new language and being fully european second class citizens.
Complain about this comment
#211 grandantidote
Didn't catch Andy Marr's show this morning so can't comment, but refer you to 258.
Also draw your attention to interesting remarks at 279 and 291.
Complain about this comment
Nick, any comments on the breaking news, sorry government leak, re top rate of tax going up to 45%?
Was it Alistair or Gordon that let it slip or maybe Lord Voldemort on the Marr show this AM?
Complain about this comment
Oh dear, first nationalisation and now higher taxes for top earners - New Labour is finished.
Complain about this comment
Well Mark Elliott at #297 has at least answered my earlier question as to why the Conservatives are unbelievably gambling on not stimulating the economy during the worst global economic crisis for eighty years.
It is, as you say Mark, an attempt to link 'New Labour' of 2008 with 'Old Labour' of 1978 (that would be thirty years ago).
What words come to mind at the height of such an economic crisis that the main policy the Tories are now offering is a crude political stunt designed soley at winning the next election?
Pathetic. Cynical. Irresponsible.
Well, they will do for starters. It is sad indeed that the Opposition has no policies for a world in grave danger of an appalling 2009, and is instead trying to refight an election which took place thirty years ago.
Intellectually bankrupt and morally contemptible would be other appropriate words.
Complain about this comment
#293 You claim that the West and radical Islam are engaged in a clash of civilisations and that the ultimate choice is to destroy or be destroyed.
This is a substantial claim, and if true has consequences for the world far beyond the impact of other events such as the current economic crisis.
Despite the enormity of the claim you provide not one shred of evidence to support your contention.
It is not possible to "like" "acknowledge" or "ignore" something if you don´t know what it is you are being invited to like, acknowledge or ignore.
I accept that there is a certain opacity to the whole subject. However there are some areas where much is known.
It is for example known that of the 19 terrorists directly responsible for the World Trade centre atrocity 17 of them were Saudi nationals. It is also known that the US response to this atrocity was to invade Iraq. It is known that the British and US authorities justified this counter assault on a 3rd party on the basis that the 3rd party in question possessed weapons of mass destruction. It is known that this claim was untrue or otherwise in error.
Given the foregoing it is reasonable that for the claim you make to be taken seriously you are required to provide evidence that supports such a claim.
If you are unable to provide such evidence then it is likely that you are in error.
Complain about this comment
The Tories just want lurid claims and negativity to stick. What they don't want is a real examination of the management and class issues that played a massive part in the failures of that time, the Thatcherism that spawned, and how it laid the foundations of today's financial meltdown.
So, yeah. You were saying? Listen, dude. I don't give a rats ass for policy free sloganised emotionalism. It's just dumb and manipulative - the stuff of the playground not the classroom, or barbarism not civilisation. Just because Cameron plays Mugabe politics doesn't mean you have to join in. C'mon, get some self-respect.
Complain about this comment
45% tax.
Thus began the descent into socialism 30 years after the beginning of it's end....or so we thought.
Look's like a new Thatcherite revolution is about to be born.
Complain about this comment
Hello Nick,
I've heard people talk about a group or charity or something called Common Purpose.
Is this something that the government has helped set up?
If so, it sounds like something positive from them for a change.
Will it be of good use to helping us in the tough times that lie ahead.
Thanks for any light you can shed on this.
Complain about this comment
By the way, regarding the proposed 45p tax band, I seem to remember Gordon the Golem ridiculing the Liberal Democrats when they suggested raising the top rate of income tax.
Complain about this comment
NorthernThatcherite: It seems you weren't joking after all! You really do seem to believe that we are in trouble because of socialism and that a 'New Thatcherism' can save us.
Well, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But so that I can be sure that I am still not misunderstanding you, just answer me one question:
Do you think that the current global economic crisis, the worst for two generations, was caused more by capitalist policies or by socialist policies? Yes or no will do.
Complain about this comment
Nick,
you guys can look back as far as you like and what have I been saying, before Cameron and the rest.
Taxes and interest rates must rise. Will nobody listen. look at the early twenties when there was an economic crisis. what do you do, you let it go, let asset values find a new base level.
Let wages fall, they are going to soon anyway. By huge amounts. How do I know, quite simple. Lots of people are going to retire over the next five years, more than ever before. What happens when you retire? Duh, you're income falls greatly. Pensions are nothing but deferred pay, so wages, and income fall.
So, if people want to hear the truth, here it is, asset values must be allowed to fall. Interest rates must rise. Taxes must rise. I am not content to leave huge debts to my sons and grandchildren so that I can maintain a standard of living which cannot be sustained.
We must exit Iraq and Afghanistan, this is not a war against terror, this is terror, we are the terrorists. We are the war criminals. we are the Nazis, fascist thugs, killers, murderers, torturers, we are the bad guys.
Complain about this comment
#307: some of you on the right seem to be having difficulty in grasping that we are in the middle of the worst global economic crisis since the 1930s. (Did you notice that most of our banks would have gone under recently without government support? Did that slip by your attention somehow?)
Of course we are looking at policies now that we would not have looked at a year or two ago. Gordon didn't propose nationalising banks before this year either. But then they weren't all on the brink of collapse as a result of the subprime lending policies originated in the US and an overly deregulated financial sector.
Having read all this blog this weekend there is one easy conclusion. Tories are coming on here and (following their leader) pretending for perceived political advantage that we are actually not in a GLOBAL economic crisis, but in some parochial UK affair caused mainly by Gordon Brown.
I actually don't believe that you all can believe this, because it is patently untrue, and you know it is. So it is disappointing that you have all chosen local political cynicism over facing up to the rather serious actual problems that the world is currently facing.
Good night!
Complain about this comment
According to nick, the following is the case regarding upping the top rate:
"However it would only raise a fraction of the sum needed to get the public finances back in order so other significant tax raising measures will have to be announced tomorrow for introduction in future years,"
No mention of cutting government spending/waste then Nick? Is the only solution that you/labour understand to throw additional money at every problem and then get the private sector hammered a few years down the line to pay for it? If they cut public spending they wouldn't have to raise taxes in future.
In fact, as the tories say, they wouldn't even have to cut public spending, they simply need to stop it from rising at the same insane levels to recoup the money.
We're back in the BBC/labour spin cycle again where nobody is willing to even bother considering looking at how/where government spends its money and where reducing the *growth* of public spending is considered a "cut". It's economic suicide to not even consider how/where the money is spent.
Reporting is so one-sided on this front that the BBC has become a joke.
I'm in the private sector and self-employed, and working my backside off just to stand still at the moment, and I find it extremely offensive that I'm forced to fund the massive guaranteed indexed linked pensions of thousands of pointless government bureaucrats while the government steals my pension and hammers me for tax in every direction it can.
Enough is enough; to hammer the private sector into bankruptcy so that they can fund an unsustainably large public sector has got to stop; there's a race at the moment and I'm not sure which one will win, the race is:
1) Carry on with labour waste and bad logic which damages the private sector to such a point that the economy collapses and we end up a 3rd world country begging the imf for money to feed ourselves.
2) We get a change of government who actually bothers to look at government spending and doesn't simply throw trillions of pounds into the air at other people's expense to solve every problem.
Also, how does a decrease in vat help anyone? It'll help the retailers because they won't change their prices and will raise their base (pre-vat) prices to compensate so that they don't need to change all their physical price labels/catalogues etc.
2.5% is pointless. Are people seriously going to say "Hey, that TV is now 10 quid cheaper so I'll now buy it". Discounts of 30% by the retailers aren't making much difference; I don't see how 2.5%, most of which won't even be passed on will help. It'll cost the tax payer billions and have no real effect at all, and it's typical of the kind of irrational negligence that I've come to expect from labour.
Complain about this comment
One of the pro-Tory tinfoil hat brigade was screaming about that a few months ago. I looked into it and it's a group that teaches people leadership and communication skills. It's a great idea to develop people's skills in these areas, so I'm not surprised the Tories are skittish of it.
It's a fact that under Thatcherism that apprenticeships and middle-management training was almost destroyed. This undermined business skill and savvy, and has led directly to industrial failure and management greed. By giving people this opportunity the green shoots of a better Britain are being nurtured.
Britain is appallingly bad at leadership and teamwork, but by giving people chances to develop proper skills and meet other people the foundations of tomorrow's thinking and cooperative leaders, entrepreneurs, and community leaders is being formed. Tory paranoia just proves they want to sell people the illusion of success but will oppose anything that really changes things.
Anyway, there's plenty of books and websites on leadership and communication. It's all out there if people want to invest some time and money. Nobody's forcing it on anyone, and it can make a real difference in how you approach things. That's gotta be better than being some Tory drone that just regurgitates propoganda.
Complain about this comment
In answer to your question............
In the last decade we've been through the "age of irresponsibily" typified by excessive borrowing based and badly regulated banking practices.
Who said that just a few weeks ago at the UN? Oh, the man who now wants the UK to borrow £300B in 36 months!
Yes...Crash Gordon!
My point is simple. Private enterprise creates wealth that the state can distribute according to the democratic wishes of the electorate.
Socialism levels people down by taxing the wealth creators and weighing down entrperneurial spirit within us with burdensome regulation and directives. if you tax the human too much we do not produce. Just watch the flight of intellect and ability that will now start with this 45% tax wheeze which is just the thin end of the wedge! There is much more to come....for everyone!
If you really want to compare capitalism with socialism then perhaps you should analyse the growth and welfare provisions of two systems in two periods. ...the USSR and the USA between 1920 and 1990. I was in Moscow at the height of the Cold War and saw for myself the utter poverty that Socialism provided for the Soviets with my own eyes. You wouldn't believe it if I told you! No wonder they wanted to throw off the shackles of Socialism when they had their chance.
In fact if you want a more contemporary comparison then look at China in it's capitalist phase and it's Socialist phase.
I don't know who you are but if you are a Socialist you're on the wrong side of history mate!
Complain about this comment
re: 308 novoludo
From my point of view the problem was that we had a socialist government coupled with a capitalist system; the 2 are incompatible.
The reason they're incompatible is because socialist governments don't understand how to run a capitalist system, so they fail to regulate/control it in the way that allows it to work.
The capitalist system itself works well, the problem is that you need someone who understands capitalism to run it, otherwise, like any private company run by an idiot, it will inevitably fail.
Brown, a socialist who doesn't understand capitalism, economics, or even basic maths, has been running the system for 11 years; that's why it's collapsed, not because capitalism itself is a bad idea but more that it's been run by an idiot for so long.
Complain about this comment
290. phoenixarisenq
Phoenix
Again all very emotive, and let me assure you that personally I feel, and would behave the same. A terrorist kills my daughter in a suicide bomb on the tube. I would happily slot him on the court house steps before the trial.
HOWEVER that is not what we are talking about here is it we are talking about the states policy towards suspects.
So again unless you can outline you specific rules of engagement (other than follow the rule of law) then your whole strategy is unworkable.
We have to outline your rules to all sorts of military personnel, CIA section chiefs and police forces all over the globe.
You cant just empower law enforcement to shoot to kill anyone they suspect and strike any place they think may be harbouring a terrorist can we. We have to give them some sort of guidance.
Im sure at least one person at the moment who is in control of launching a missile thinks that Iranian government should take a hit today. Do we let him do it, on his own initiative?
If we dont set binding rules, who decides how flexible they can be. You, me. the PM, a local bobby with a gun?
You say you cant outline rules, but you can hardly allow a free for all can you.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes @303 wrote:
"Despite the enormity of the claim you provide not one shred of evidence to support your contention."
If, despite the 'enormity' of available evidence (especially since 11th September 2001, but also plenty that precedes that date) you cannot see it, then you are truly blind.
There is no point in debating this - especially not on this blog which is devoted to UK politics.
So, back to Gordon the dissembler....
Complain about this comment
Nick,
isn't it interesting what is happening in Iceland. How long before the riots happen again on the streets of Britain. The British are sometimes accused of just talk, talk, talk, well maybe, just maybe things are about to change. Wonderful to see when socialists have to beat up on their own people, this could be so cool.
Complain about this comment
#295, Charles_E_Hardwidge,
You mentioned "Gordon Brown spent most of his political career behind a desk and fielding bullshit and attitude isn't something he was geared up to deal with in the past."
I can well understand that as he was the one giving out the bullshit and attitude, it has been the characteristic of that nasty piece of work since he first became chancellor.
BTW are you one of the spin doctors employed by brown to convince the masses that he is not the pension thief, national debt creator, cozener that we all have identified for a long while now.
As for tonight's news it says two things to me, firstly how come the BBC got an advanced briefing/leak before Captain Darling's speech, in the pocket springs to mind, and secondly it's like being in the heady old days of Wilson and Callaghan. What was that old slogan, sting the rich or something I recall, only the rich turned out to be anybody with a half decent job and the rich and/or brainy went overseas. Maybe Brown had better be careful as he will create a new brain drain as it's much easier to move into the EU these days as I know very well.
Complain about this comment
Nick, is "Borrowing payback" the accepted labour/BBC doublespeak for tax rises then?
I guess, following the "don't mention recession, call it a downturn" approach, you guys at the bbc will do whatever you can to obfuscate the truth.
By the way, a "downturn" usually indicates a reduction in growth only, so we're no longer in a downturn, we're now in a recession because growth is negative. But I'm sure that won't hamper the BBC from spinning their labour lies where they say that the tory's proposals of a reduction in the growth of public spending is a cut (it's not a cut, it's just a smaller increase, or does the BBC not understand maths to the standard of a 10 year old?)
Complain about this comment
So, Dave - "I'm the man with a plan" - Cameron has let us know his plan.
Unless I have missed something, it appears to be....
1 - We will not match Labour's spending plans after the next election.
2 - We will use the terms 'Tax bombshell' and 'Tax con' in every soundbite repeatedly.
3 - Errr......thats it......
Yes, that should really sort out a global economic crisis.
He is an embaraasment.......him and Osborne should go away and hide in a gentlemans club somewhere and come out when Labour have got us through this difficult time.
Bill
Complain about this comment
Post 311 Getridofgordonnnow
Couldn't agree more!!!!!!!!! Spot on about the private/public sector balance.........or inbalance!
Time for a Thatcherite revolution to roll back the state and all it's excesses!
Complain about this comment
Nick,
what transpires over Ross is that he has his own production company, and therefore Ross is not paid by the BBC but the company is. Ross is not employed by the BBC, this I believe to be true, but by his production company.
Now I think we ought to be told if you are actually directly employed by the BBC, or are you effectively an independent contractor through a separate company, hired by the BBC to perform your analysis, and to do this blog.
It might help some people to understand how the BBC has changed, furthermore are you really therefore a SME, and not a person at all.
Complain about this comment
So, you don't know anything about globalisation or people? That figures.
And it has more to do with this blog than your rancid little comments.
I don't have to be smart or do anything when my enemies are so dumb and shoot themselves in the back.
p0wned.
Complain about this comment
#314 getridofgordon: If the problem was having a socialist (Brown) running a capitalist system, how come the US is in such a mess after eight years of an extreme capitalist government under Bush? Wasn't that a capitalist government running a capitalist system? How come they have nevertheless have been the prime orginators of the worst economic crisis in two generations?
Something a bit faulty with your logic there methinks! There is an easier explanation: an extreme capitalist experiment just crashed because it was too extreme. This one has the merit of actually fitting the facts.
Complain about this comment
No 310, please remind me who set up the regulatory framework in the first place?
And it's no good just blaming the Americans, since if you blame the Americans for the crash, a natural consequence is to wonder how much it was America that was responsible for the boom.
The truth is, of course, that the current crisis is much worse because the natural correction that should've occured circa 2001 was deferred by a fiscal stimulus in America. The kind of stimulus that Gordon the Golem is contemplating now - it just defers the day of reckoning.
It is the Golem's fault. It was the Golem who restricted the BoE to just looking at inflation, rather than the economy as a whole, which meant the BoE has been behind the curve all along. He bangs on about interest rates being historically low, but that just means there isn't scope for much of a fall.
However, the biggest thing going against the Golem is the sheer delight he is taking in this crisis. Oh, he witters on about looking after "hard working families" - when less and less people are able to work hard - but everyone can see he's having the time of his life.
No one forgave Norman Lamont for his evident delight in the collapse of Britain's membership of the ERM (which, incidentally the Golem supported until, opportunistically, he changed his tune after the facts) and I suspect few will forgive the Golem for this, once it's all calmed down.
Complain about this comment
#315
If a terrorist was to kill your daughter in a suicide attack on a tube then who exactly would you 'slot'. That is the whole point of a suicide attack, they take the 'enemy' with them. They have no intention of surviving.
They don't have access to the same sort of weaponry we employ against them so they do suicide missions. Bit like the Kamikaze pilots in WWII.
Bit like when our soldiers went over the top in WWI into a fusilade of machine gun bullets, but they kept walking forward until they were mown down and left to die in some rat infested shell hole. At least a suicide bomber takes some of the enemy with them.
In the same way that you would 'slot' the terrorist they want to 'slot' you, your daughter and everybody else responsible for invading their country. Remember, it is the west who brought in borders into the middle east, not the Arabs. if it were not for their oil do you seriously think we would give a fig for them. Of course not.
Oh, and who exactly was it that dropped a nuclear weapon on a defenceless City in Japan, now that is terror. Who used agent orange leaving thousands of children born with deformities. Answers on a postcard please to the usual suspects.
The west has an awful lot to answer for. We must try to adhere to International Law, without the law we are not sentient animals at all, we are just animals.
Complain about this comment
Ok, so a plasma tv which normally sells for 1275 quid comes down to 1240 (give or take a few pennies, and assuming the retailers pass on the full vat reduction which they won't).
"Oh, that 30 quid off the telly that costs over a grand makes all the difference then, I'll buy it."
I don't think so.
Brown's even more stupid than I'd thought; everytime you think he can't do anything more stupid than he has already, he blindsides you with a policy so monumentally stupid (and costly to the tax payer) that you know for a fact he's running a scorched earth policy.
Complain about this comment
re: 324 novoludo
The american problem was a similar root cause; the system was run by idiots for too long. Granted in their instance they were mostly republican idiots.
Although from what I can work out it was actually under Clinton, a democrat, that the real seeds were sown for the collapse because he's the one who started off forcing/telling the banks to lend money to people who couldn't afford it so they could all have big houses.
If the system's run by stupid people then it'll fail. Socialists are intrinsically stupid when it comes to how to run a capitalist system because they refuse to learn about the system as they don't like it. Capitalists can also be stupid, and so can also destroy their economy.
You need the system run by someone who knows what they're doing. Personally I don't actually care whether they're socialist or capitalist, as long as they're competent and don't destroy the country.
Complain about this comment
Post 324 Nuvoludo
Please reply to post 313.
I can't wait to hear how Socialism is better overall than capitalism!
Complain about this comment
Has anyone told Gordon Brown that vat isn't actually levied on food or children's clothes or mortgages or council tax? He seems to be under the mistaken impression that his vat reduction will help the poor.
Methinks a 10pct tax rate doubling moment may come along where he says, "oh, I didn't think of that. oops. nevermind."
Complain about this comment
#325: You seriously believe that the global economic crisis was caused by poor regulatory practices in the UK? Or what on earth are you saying?
Again, it seems for cynical political reasons you Tories are having a hard time facing up to a basic irrefutable fact: we are in the middle of a GLOBAL CRISIS OF CAPITALISM.
(Not a local crisis of socialism.)
Hint: that's why all the other countries in the world are in desperate trouble too.
Complain about this comment
NorthernThatcherite: Let's go back to a day or two ago on this blog. "Extreme communism failed, and now it seems that extreme capitalism has failed too".
That is: Thatcherism has failed. The experiment began in the late 1970s reached its logical and inevitable conclusion in the dreadful crisis we are now witnessing. Its basic premises have been shown to be wrong: markets are not self-correcting and self-regulating, and a strong role for governments is required to regulate them. Thatcher was wrong. Brown was also wrong to continue these same policies.
Sensible realistic policies are those operated by social democratic societies who use markets where appropriate and regulated, and governments otherwise. Where education and health care is guaranteed for all (i.e. not like in the most Thatcherite country, the US), where inequalities are not excessive, and where important sectors like banking have to operate in the overall public interest. You can call this socialist or social democratic, I don't care. It is not pure capitalism, and it is not Thatcherism. They don't work. This has now been proven.
Now, you answer my question. Was the current global economic crisis caused more by socialist policies or more by capitalist policies?
Complain about this comment
Those labels are largely redundant and just get in the way. People would be better off understanding the bigger picture and flow of events. The Tao may be 6000 years old but it's as good a treatise on this as anything.
Socialism and capitalism are mere perspectives of an underlying reality. The Tao suggests that everything arises from the Yin (or female, or Socialist), and that the Yang (or macho, or Capitalism) always collapses back into the Yin.
You can see a similar dynamic in communication or marketing. The punchy, shrill, and cheap blow looks powerful and get a lot of attention for little effort (like Guido Fawkes), but the more subtle, long-term, and gentle always prevails.
Complain about this comment
im sick to the back teeth of the constant spin and drip feeding details to the BBC before major policy announcements by this government.
details of a VAT cut are magically released early weekend, after 24 hours a little bit more information is released via robert peston or nick robinson.
no doubt after analysis of political blogs and public opinion is taken by labour workers, which reveals that middle england isnt happy about paying for a low paid money boost, down the line, then another bit of information is drip fed to the BBC, now high earners will face higher taxes further down the line.
its pathetic, its obvious and shows just how useless this government is. they are control freaks!
nicks blog here states "the government will not confirm any details" but i bet a weeks wages that its 99% accurate!
why not name your sources nick?
this is one of the most important policy announcements in decades, vital to all the british public, yet brown and darling are like circus jugglers, trying to look competant whilst dropping balls...
so much for brown's pledge to end policy announcements via the gmtv sofa!
it is disturbing, that the BBC get a drip feed of policy detail, in advance of the opposition parties that are elected to hold the government to account!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
329 Northern Thatcherite
"I can't wait to hear how Socialism is better overall than capitalism"
You are winding us up. The name is a giveaway. Labour isn't that socialist anymore. Only the right wingers who congregate here think it is. its more like Thatcherism lite. The Capitalist model is no more the perfect model than communism. Like our diets too much of something is bad for us. we need balance. Private sector wealth creation yes. but public sector isn't evil It can be seen as wealth creation enabling if you must. Your narrow black and white socialist or Capitalist question is no longer relevant. Hasn't been for ages. Our parties need to lift their heads from their book of dogma, look at the world and start thinking. I think Cameron thinks its his turn and he can get in without any effort. I hope he's proved wrong.
Complain about this comment
I've just realised that a vat reduction will only help the truly stinking rich, so maybe labour supporters on this blog can justify it?
I already worked out before that for most poor/normal people it won't have any effect that they'd notice (because firstly it's too small, and secondly most essentials like food/mortgages don't incur vat in the first place).
But I've only just tumbled to who will gain from it in a way that they'd actually notice it, and that's basically just people who buy something like a yacht and then flee the uk before the bill comes in on the future tax rises.
Do the labour supporters on here think that's a good socialist thing to do?
Complain about this comment
re: 331 novoludo
no; you're misunderstanding/misrepresenting what I said (a common labour trait).
What I said was that it was caused by stupid people of both parties, but that chiefly it's been the left-wing parties in both the uk and usa that made the biggest mistakes.
The uk and the usa made similar mistakes to each other, it's basically both the uk's fault and the usa's fault for being run so badly.
That's why france hate us so much right now, and why Sarkozy refuses to talk to Brown and will only talk to Blair instead. Everyone knows that the uk and the usa are the root causes of the global problems.
The americans mucked-up, but so did we. (ie we both caused the meltdown).
But then, to make it worse, our domestic economy has been run so badly that there's nothing to cushion us from those global problems that the uk/usa created.
My point was that the capitalist system failed, but only because it wasn't being run properly by the uk/usa governments. The capitalist system works but it needs to be run properly. Labour have been running it into the ground, and Clinton did a lot to help run the usa economy into the ground too.
An an analogy, you might have a private company which does really well for many years because it sells good products and has an efficient setup, but then the director is replaced by an idiot who gives all the products away for free for 5 years. It's not the company or the products which are intrinsically bad, it's the director who caused it to crash by his stupidity.
Complain about this comment
In Mah Jong Quest II players again meet up with Kwazi, the main character in the original Mah Jong Quest, who has grown from child to teenager. Kwazi and the world are suddenly thrust into imbalance, with Kwazi's entire persona split into Yin and Yang. Until the balance in the universe is restored, there is no harmony for Kwazi.
Who is Kwazi, you or Duff Gordon?
I take it that Duff Gordon is Yang - macho and capitalism, along with numerous other failing traits, certainly describes his actions over the last decade. You state that Yang will collapse back into Yin. If thats what we have to look forward to - God help us we are all stuffed.
Mah Jong Quest II, a game I play now and again for distraction. The realms of fantasy you write about and admit belonging to.
Me I live in the real world I design electronic hardware, software and firmware for solutions, hopefully, that will help solve environmental problems in tomorrows real world.
As for the rest I do not think that Tao, Yin, Yang or Kwaszi are real solutions for peoples real problems. Not today or even tomorrow.
All I see Chuck is that you are still gazing at your belly button.
Complain about this comment
#336 dhwilkinson
Well, Well DH you have surpassed yourself. Short yet sweet.
Agree with your comment except the last line. NuLabour does need a break even if its only to flush Thatcherite Lite from the system and to debunk those numpties at Westmidden and within the party who support it.
Complain about this comment
TAG@317
I agree.
Complain about this comment
I wondered about that but it's being matched with a later rise in top end tax. The tax system is a mess and making it fit for purpose and fairer isn't easy but Labour seem to be shaping up to the challenge. Somehow, I can't see the Tories doing that.
Carl Sagan commented that science was like holding a candle up to the dark. Well, the Tao is no different. It's just another technology, so just as real as anything else.
Just for the record, you're being quite ignorant and rude about things. You might want to reflect on that before mouthing off and taking a cheap swipe at someone.
Save the ego for someone who cares, 'kay?
Complain about this comment
#342 Chuck_E_Hardwidge
My, My Chuck why don?t you float this tosh on the stock market. They, currently, need all the help you can give them!
To quote you - Me I am a Jedi, I am worth a 100 of you!
Complain about this comment
This essay is as good a place to start as any:
The Tao of Economics
The Just Distribution of Wealth & the Invisible Hand
By Todd F. Eklof
October 12, 2008
PDF: [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
If you spent five minutes with a search engine instead of being arrogant and nasty you would've found it yourself. You might want to unlearn that before your boss promotes you to management or plonks you in front of customers.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Like the increase in the top rate of tax the drop in The VAT rate is miniscule and will do little to alleviate our financial problems or the plight of the poor. If these measures are the main thrust of this mini budget we're in deep trouble.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
32;
Gentlemans clubs, top hats, Eton, tally ho, tea parties, okay ya, yuppies, Henley Regatta, balls, polo, hunting, etc. etc. etc. .................................................................................................................................
Do you by chance wear a cloth cap and overalls or maybe just a sporran and a big chip on your shoulder?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
All this "window dressing" by the government does not help the middle class people who are paying 40% tax and ending the month with no disposable cash or worse dipping into savings every month. I am a single parent (widowed). I pay a nanny 120GBP a week while I receive 45GBP a month!! in Tax Credits for my son, I am depleting my savings and not putting anything back in. So where will the governments incentives help me?
Complain about this comment
#350 Bugsy
10% of people in work pay higher-rate income tax - us Brits have always had an interesting definition of the word "middle" when it comes to income! [check out the HMRC income tax stats]
I guess you'll be telling us next that £150,000 is 'upper middle' and that increasing the tax rate on earnings above this by 13% (from 40p in the pound to 45p in the pound) is an assault on the middle-classes by these dreadful socialists, or taxing the rich until their pips squeak (and they squawk).
If you can't make ends meet on a salary over £45,000 (over 3 times the minimum wage) maybe you ought to cut back on some luxuries?
Complain about this comment
315. , CarrotsneedaQUANGO2
Good morning,
In the cold light of day, without adding up "rights" or "wrongs" I would be very happy if Britain went ahead and got rid of as many of the terrorists as possible, and the public showed the armed forces that they were behind them all the way. So if we are not completely ethical, by the lights of perfection, so what? At the end of the day its them or us.
326. T A Griffin (TAG)
Good Day,
If you want to play that game, who created the Burma Road and starved and worked slave labour to death? Not the West!
We are all going around in circles. Those of us wanting ideal behaviour in a wicked world, and the rest of us who want civilisation without being brought down by a load of pre-Stone Age savages.
Complain about this comment
Chuck EHHHH @323,
Uses the phrase 'rancid little comment'
Yet my responses get 'censored'
Let go......
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
352. phoenixarisenq
I agree with your motives and ideals but we have to give the security forces a brief dont we.
If you cant outline exactly what they can do to whom and when then it isnt a policy its just emotive rhetoric.
You at least have to outline an example of what is right and what is wrong.
Is bombing a wedding party acceptable because a suspected terrorist is attending it.
Is bombing a hospital acceptable because it treats suspected terrorists
Is bombing someones house acceptable because a suspected terrorist may be staying there.
Can you even define suspected terrorist please.
Is it a friend or family member of a known and convicted terrorist, or just a person whose made rather a lots of visits to an axis of evil state.
Can you even outline exactly what we can do these people.
Say your brother converted to Islam, trained bombers and is now convicted and in jail. Would it be legitimate for the US to kidnap you and hold you in a cell in Cuba and torture you until they can establish if you are were also involved or that you knew about his actions and kept quiet.
If a known organiser of 9.11 were to make a quick phone call from a school yard in North London would it be ok for a US warship to launch or a missile at it.
Now Im sure you think some of these situations would be OK and some would not be. But there are others out there who think that for the great good all of the above would be perfectly acceptable.
So unless you can outline clear and defined rues of engagement your position is untenable.
Complain about this comment
355. , CarrotsneedaQUANGO2
If, if, if, ......frankly I dont' give a damn at the so called rights and wrongs anymore. There are enough bleeding-hearts out there worrying about the other side. This isn't playground war games, where fairness may play a part. This is the real world, and its them or us. If innocent people hurt, I'm tired of it being on our side, let the others suffer too.
So my position is unetnable. Just be glad I'm not in charge!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
356. phoenixarisenq
Im certainly no bleeding heart liberal. If you could strike every dead cert terrorist with a magic bullet Id help you.
I am however worried about what we become as a nation if the state ignors the rule of law.
Once the state goes off the straight and narrow, a much bigger problem arises.
State officials will always justify the means to an end, usually their end. Hence why we have over 70 local authorities using anti terror legislation to spy on people and the times they put thier bins out. Along with parents whom they suspect of giving incorrect address on school application forms and no doubt much much more.
No... not in my name thanks very much.
Complain about this comment
358
Yes, pal
I so agree with you.
The reason I sound so terse is I'm sick at all the draconian measures used against us, and yet the wailing goes on if there is any suspicion that we are being unfair to our enemies.
Officials sneak around peering into our rubbish bins. They fine people for dropping sweet papers into the very few public rubbish bins on the street, why I cannot imagine. They craftily question little infants as to where they live in the classroom, under the guise of educating them. All this is like a George Orwell or Aldous Huxley nightmare.
I must avoid being emotive, but isn't this rather like internal terrorism?
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown advised us of an old saying..."a stich in time etc". Howver, I would remind him of an old saying "never gamble with borrowed money"....Rod Pesch
Complain about this comment
348:
Sorry 32;
Should read 320!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As always there is nothing new:
We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity, is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
Winston Churchill
Complain about this comment
#316 I do not consider myself to be blind, and yet I still see no evidence that we are engaged in a clash of civilisations where our choice is reduced to one of destroy or be destroyed.
Your comment that this blog is devoted to UK politics and the consequent implication that this subject is therefore irrelevent is at best disingenuious and at worst stupid.
The UK has a substantial military presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and those soldiers are where they are as a direct consequence of UK political decisions.
In World War 2 the Soviet Union, and others faced the stark choice that you describe - i.e. to destroy or be destroyed. I see no evidence that the situation today is in any way comparable.
I have travelled, lived and worked extensively in the Middle East and I have no sense that in general the people in that area consider themselves to be engaged in a conflict of the nature you describe. It is probably the case that the average citizen in the Middle East is considerably less militant than you appear to be.
It is true that the situation may deteriorate and one sure way of ensuring any such deterioration is to abandon adherance to the law and to normal standards of civilisation. A route that you appear only too keen to go down - and all the while providing no evidence, but contenting yourself with schoolboy invective.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes @364,
You are, of course, right that this subject should be discussed on a UK politics forum, however, I didn't want to do so on this thread (and it was late) - hence the lame excuse. Apologies.
I, too, have "travelled, lived and worked extensively in the Middle East". I am also reasonably acquainted with the language(s) culture(s) and local histories of the muslim peoples from Morocco in the west to Indonesia in the east. (I'm not familiar with the Philippines).
It is ironic that our respective experiences have lead to different conclusions.
Nothing I have seen or read in the past few years has convinced me otherwise. We are at war whether we like it or not, and will remain so until Islamism is defeated either by us or by the citizens of the countries in which it spawns. Unfortunately, due to the backward, repressive and authoritarian regimes that rule most of the muslim world, the second option is unlikely.
Complain about this comment