Greg, now can we get rid of Osborne please?

DonDaddyD

Britain could be on course for its third recession in four years after the economy shrank by 0.3% in the last three months of 2012.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21193525
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013 ... ession-gdp

Or at the very least can I punch him in the face?

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez. Then there is all the confusion with education, healthcare and the decimation of other public services. Things do not look good.

Discuss.

tailwindhome

Who know who should replace him.







That's right.

Sharktopus. He sort this sh1t out and no mistake.


Discuss.

notsoblue

How do you pick and choose who you tug your forelock to? I can't figure it out.

Koncordski

DonDaddyD wrote:

Britain could be on course for its third recession in four years after the economy shrank by 0.3% in the last three months of 2012.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21193525
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013 ... ession-gdp

Or at the very least can I punch him in the face?

Discuss.

The guardian and the BBC, balanced. I think you're giving him entirely too much credit if you think that changing him will magically fix the problems we're in.

veronese68

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

tailwindhome

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez. Then there is all the confusion with education, healthcare and the decimation of other public services. Things do not look good.

Discuss.

On the plus side the global warming seems to have gone away. Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

DonDaddyD

Koncordski wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Britain could be on course for its third recession in four years after the economy shrank by 0.3% in the last three months of 2012.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21193525
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013 ... ession-gdp

Or at the very least can I punch him in the face?

Discuss.

The guardian and the BBC, balanced. I think you're giving him entirely too much credit if you think that changing him will magically fix the problems we're in.

Even if 40+ years ago a virgin gave birth to a child and that child grew up to love this Country and had a godly nounce for economics and they became Chancellor, I doubt they would be able to magically solve things. Europe is a mess and we can't compete with emerging markets - but internally the trading between one British company to another and having an insular wealth, we can't even seem to encourage that.

But why I think Osborne needs to be pushed if he won't step down is because people said the plan wouldn't work, they were dismissed as the hysterical opposition. The plan wasn't working and then the business minds pointed it out and they were dismissed as doom sayers geared towards caution. The plan didn't work and the people and shop owners pointed this out and we were dismissed and told to weather the storm. The plan hasn't worked and I think the dude wants to cut even more. Cuts are fine, but what is he going to do to encourage growth and create jobs? That questioned was asked years ago and nearly every measure he has implemented has had marginal effects while he continues his deficit programme which is at the heart of our stalling economy.

AND NO, I don't think the Government can go on spending providing public sector jobs at a rate similar to the previous Government. But as oppose to a slow and steady reduction in public funding and benefits so that the private sector could slowly pick up the flak.

Someone just let me punch him in the face.

DonDaddyD

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

jds_1981

DonDaddyD wrote:

But why I think Osborne needs to be pushed if he won't step down is because people said the plan wouldn't work, they were dismissed as the hysterical opposition.

TBF, they were the comments on the guardian website. Quite a few business 'leaders' and economists were behind the plans.

mudcow007

DonDaddyD wrote:

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

So you went looking for -

pick n mix
cheat book for super mario brothers
washing machine
keep fit dvd
camera to record your self doing (above) keep fit dvd
swimmers cap
from me to you tacky teddy bear
a nice cardigan from peacocks
a tent for when your mrs see's your recorder keep fit video an slings you out
tap dance shoes
an a sports bra...

sounds like my average weekly shop

jds_1981

DonDaddyD wrote:

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

Barely viable businesses close during a recession. Sucks but what do you expect?

TheStone

There really isn't much austerity. They're still printing and spending as much as they can get away with.

The level of GDP we had was based on unsustainable debt. That burst in a bad way. We're not going to see growth for many, many years.

veronese68

DonDaddyD wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

Yep, you've been to Raynes Park.

DonDaddyD

TheStone wrote:

There really isn't much austerity. They're still printing and spending as much as they can get away with.

The level of GDP we had was based on unsustainable debt. That burst in a bad way. We're not going to see growth for many, many years.

I'm not expecting the UK to maintain a level of GDP it had under the Labour years. It was just unsustainable it was artificial and what we are seeing is probably closer to our current level of GDP. The issue is how quickly we get there and the ripple effect too quick a drop will have.

Think of it this way. The ground is the real GDP and the stone in your hand is public spending/borrowed money and it is held at the height of the inflated (false) GDP. You drop the stone (literally stop public spending and borrowing money) from that height and not only does it hit the ground but it sends out waves which disrupts everything else. You do the same thing again but this time you don't drop the stone, you lower it gentley, slowly but surely until it reaches the ground. When it does reach the ground there are no waves causing additional damage.

Osborne cut too quickly too harshly. He should have taken a slowly more managable deficit reduction approach so that the economy could compensate with it.

coopster_the_1st

DonDaddyD wrote:

But why I think Osborne needs to be pushed if he won't step down is because people said the plan wouldn't work, they were dismissed as the hysterical opposition. The plan wasn't working and then the business minds pointed it out and they were dismissed as doom sayers geared towards caution. The plan didn't work and the people and shop owners pointed this out and we were dismissed and told to weather the storm. The plan hasn't worked and I think the dude wants to cut even more. Cuts are fine, but what is he going to do to encourage growth and create jobs? That questioned was asked years ago and nearly every measure he has implemented has had marginal effects while he continues his deficit programme which is at the heart of our stalling economy.

AND NO, I don't think the Government can go on spending providing public sector jobs at a rate similar to the previous Government. But as oppose to a slow and steady reduction in public funding and benefits so that the private sector could slowly pick up the flak.

Someone just let me punch him in the face.

Let's put this simplified scenario to you taking your personal finances:

- In the year 2000 you are earning £25k a year
- You predict you will be earning £40k in 2005
- Because you will earn £40k in 2005, you spend £40k this year and every year upto 2005 knowing that in 2005 you will be earning enough to cover what you are spending. You are borrowing to cover your spending
- Year earn £40k in 2005
- You predict you will earn £60k in 2010
- You spend £60k in 2005 and every following year with the knowledge your 2010 earnings will cover this. Again you are borrowing to cover your spending
- In 2007 you are earning £50k and on your way to a £60k salary in 2010
- In 2008 you get a paycut to £45k and stay at that salary for the next 3 years but you still spend £60k a year

It comes to 2010 and your bank says that are your salary is no longer rising and you have so much debt that you are now no longer allowed to borrow to cover your spending. How much pain and how long do you think it will take for you to get to a point where you would be comfortable again?

The above on a much larger scale is what we are now having to deal with. I don't think it matters who is in charge of the plan, until we are at a resolution, it is going to be painful!

TheStone

DonDaddyD wrote:

Osborne cut too quickly too harshly. He should have taken a slowly more managable deficit reduction approach so that the economy could compensate with it.

He really hasn't cut much. The token gesture cuts so far are well below what Labour said they do.
The deficit is getting larger.

You're right that government borrowing has replaced private borrowing in an attempt to keep GDP higher. They're not even borrowing this money as it's printed by the BoE. Eventually this will collapse too.

Stag on

This may be of interest

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comm ... nding.html

As "Thestone" correctly notes, public spending has barely been cut. I personally find this absolutely staggering.

I am not one to wear a tin foil hat, but I can see big problems ahead. The US financial tin can has been kicked further down the road and with the eurozone in the eye of the storm, the laser beam may soon be turned on Sterling.

jds_1981

TheStone wrote:

You're right that government borrowing has replaced private borrowing in an attempt to keep GDP higher. They're not even borrowing this money as it's printed by the BoE. Eventually this will collapse too.

Are you sure about this?

EKE_38BPM

It won't change the present situation, but I think deregulation of what shops can sell what is a bad thing.

If you go to a supermarket today you can buy TVs, DVD players, electrics and electronics, bike accessories, DIY stuff, clothing, books etc etc.
All of this means that specialist shops have been undercut by the various supermarkets and are now closing down/have closed down. The exception to this trend seems to have been Woolworths who stayed true to their original product spread and have now gone.
The small specialist shops in the High Street have gone to the wall and have been replaced with bookies, pawn shops and chicken shops. The big supermarkets have moved away from the High Street and into big retail parks and the small versions of the big supermarkets are ubiquitous on the High streets, having taken the place of the 'Open All Hours' type tobacconist/sweet shop/news agent.

Big chains take the money out of the local area and into the pockets of the owners; in ADSAs case, to America.

I'm not saying that I don't shop in supermarkets, because I do, but I think it is wrong to be able to walk (or in most people's cases, drive) past every small shop on the high street and buy everything from a mobile phone to mung beans, from a Blue Ray disc to bacon, from petrol to pharmaceuticals, from insurance to an ice tray, from a TV to tzatziki in one shop.

Sewinman

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Let's put this simplified scenario to you taking your personal finances:

- In the year 2000 you are earning £25k a year
- You predict you will be earning £40k in 2005
- Because you will earn £40k in 2005, you spend £40k this year and every year upto 2005 knowing that in 2005 you will be earning enough to cover what you are spending. You are borrowing to cover your spending
- Year earn £40k in 2005
- You predict you will earn £60k in 2010
- You spend £60k in 2005 and every following year with the knowledge your 2010 earnings will cover this. Again you are borrowing to cover your spending
- In 2007 you are earning £50k and on your way to a £60k salary in 2010
- In 2008 you get a paycut to £45k and stay at that salary for the next 3 years but you still spend £60k a year

It comes to 2010 and your bank says that are your salary is no longer rising and you have so much debt that you are now no longer allowed to borrow to cover your spending. How much pain and how long do you think it will take for you to get to a point where you would be comfortable again?

The above on a much larger scale is what we are now having to deal with. I don't think it matters who is in charge of the plan, until we are at a resolution, it is going to be painful!

The trouble with simplified scenarios using personal finance to analyse government spending is that they have absolutely sod all to do with government spending.

MaxwellBygraves

I think this is still my fave Osborne clip, other than perhaps when he was booed by the whole Olympic stadium this summer.

Sewinman

His real name is Gideon.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Wiki wrote:

From the 1960s to the 1980s, overall real economic growth has been called a "miracle": a 10% average in the 1960s, a 5% average in the 1970s and a 4% average in the 1980s.[30] By the late Eighties, Japan had moved from being a low-wage to a high-wage economy.[31]

Growth slowed markedly in the late 1990s also termed the Lost Decade, largely due to the Bank of Japan's failure to cut interest rates quickly enough to counter after-effects of over-investment during the late 1980s. Some economists believe that because the Bank of Japan failed to cut rates quickly enough, Japan entered a liquidity trap. Therefore, to keep its economy afloat, Japan ran massive budget deficits (added trillions in Yen to Japanese financial system) to finance large public works programs.

By 1998, Japan's public works projects still could not stimulate demand enough to end the economy's stagnation. In desperation, the Japanese government undertook "structural reform" policies intended to wring speculative excesses from the stock and real estate markets. Unfortunately, these policies led Japan into deflation on numerous occasions between 1999 and 2004. In his 1998 paper, Japan's Trap, Princeton economics professor Paul Krugman argued that based on a number of models, Japan had a new option. Krugman's plan called for a rise in inflation expectations to, in effect, cut long-term interest rates and promote spending.[32]

Japan used another technique, somewhat based on Krugman's, called Quantitative easing. As opposed to flooding the money supply with newly printed money, the Bank of Japan expanded the money supply internally to raise expectations of inflation. Initially, the policy failed to induce any growth, but it eventually began to affect inflationary expectations. By late 2005, the economy finally began what seems to be a sustained recovery. GDP growth for that year was 2.8%, with an annualized fourth quarter expansion of 5.5%, surpassing the growth rates of the US and European Union during the same period.[33] Unlike previous recovery trends, domestic consumption has been the dominant factor of growth.

Despite having interest rates down near zero for a long period of time, the Quantitative easing strategy did not succeed in stopping price deflation.[34] This led some economists, such as Paul Krugman, and some Japanese politicians, to speak of deliberately causing hyperinflation.[35] In July 2006, the zero-rate policy was ended. In 2008, the Japanese Central Bank still has the lowest interest rates in the developed world, deflation has still not been eliminated[36] and the Nikkei 225 has fallen over approximately 50% (between June 2007 and December 2008). The Economist has suggested that improvements to bankruptcy law, land transfer law, and tax laws will aid Japan's economy. In recent years, Japan has been the top export market for almost 15 trading nations worldwide.

10 to 15 years to dig ourselves out of this. No matter who has the purse strings.

Still, Gordon made boom and bust a thing of the past so well done him. Perhaps not in the way he intended though.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

Actually, I wonder if these shops will be missed? After all, the reason they're going under is that there just isn't a consumer base for that kind of stuff in that kind of shop any more. Surely its a good thing that they're allowed to go under and are no longer a long term burden on their creditors? People will lose their jobs, but they would have done so anyway.

cyclingprop

DDD has my vote for chancellor for two reasons:

1) Because he knows everything (and I mean EVERYTHING!)
2) Because the press people wouldn't let him post anymore.

tailwindhome

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

Wiki wrote:

From the 1960s to the 1980s, overall real economic growth has been called a "miracle": a 10% average in the 1960s, a 5% average in the 1970s and a 4% average in the 1980s.[30] By the late Eighties, Japan had moved from being a low-wage to a high-wage economy.[31]

Growth slowed markedly in the late 1990s also termed the Lost Decade, largely due to the Bank of Japan's failure to cut interest rates quickly enough to counter after-effects of over-investment during the late 1980s. Some economists believe that because the Bank of Japan failed to cut rates quickly enough, Japan entered a liquidity trap. Therefore, to keep its economy afloat, Japan ran massive budget deficits (added trillions in Yen to Japanese financial system) to finance large public works programs.

By 1998, Japan's public works projects still could not stimulate demand enough to end the economy's stagnation. In desperation, the Japanese government undertook "structural reform" policies intended to wring speculative excesses from the stock and real estate markets. Unfortunately, these policies led Japan into deflation on numerous occasions between 1999 and 2004. In his 1998 paper, Japan's Trap, Princeton economics professor Paul Krugman argued that based on a number of models, Japan had a new option. Krugman's plan called for a rise in inflation expectations to, in effect, cut long-term interest rates and promote spending.[32]

Japan used another technique, somewhat based on Krugman's, called Quantitative easing. As opposed to flooding the money supply with newly printed money, the Bank of Japan expanded the money supply internally to raise expectations of inflation. Initially, the policy failed to induce any growth, but it eventually began to affect inflationary expectations. By late 2005, the economy finally began what seems to be a sustained recovery. GDP growth for that year was 2.8%, with an annualized fourth quarter expansion of 5.5%, surpassing the growth rates of the US and European Union during the same period.[33] Unlike previous recovery trends, domestic consumption has been the dominant factor of growth.

Despite having interest rates down near zero for a long period of time, the Quantitative easing strategy did not succeed in stopping price deflation.[34] This led some economists, such as Paul Krugman, and some Japanese politicians, to speak of deliberately causing hyperinflation.[35] In July 2006, the zero-rate policy was ended. In 2008, the Japanese Central Bank still has the lowest interest rates in the developed world, deflation has still not been eliminated[36] and the Nikkei 225 has fallen over approximately 50% (between June 2007 and December 2008). The Economist has suggested that improvements to bankruptcy law, land transfer law, and tax laws will aid Japan's economy. In recent years, Japan has been the top export market for almost 15 trading nations worldwide.

10 to 15 years to dig ourselves out of this. No matter who has the purse strings.

Still, Gordon made boom and bust a thing of the past so well done him. Perhaps not in the way he intended though.

Godzilla was Japanese.

Sharktopus would take him though.

walkingbootweather

Stag on wrote:

This may be of interest

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comm ... nding.html

As "Thestone" correctly notes, public spending has barely been cut. I personally find this absolutely staggering.

Not really surprising. Lots more public servants have lost their jobs than Osborne originally stated and getting rid of people is expensive (redundancy payments, re-organisation etc.). Arguably savings will be seen in the future, but public services are likely to be reduced.

EKE_38BPM

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

Actually, I wonder if these shops will be missed? After all, the reason they're going under is that there just isn't a consumer base for that kind of stuff in that kind of shop any more. ...

Yes there is, its just that they (we) just get lots of that stuff from the massive supermarkets.
Why go to HMV when you can buy CDs and DVDs in Sainsburys.
Why go to Game when you can buy the latest games in Tesco.
Why go to Comet when you can buy kettles, toasters, fridges and TVs in ASDA.
Why go to Jessops when your phone has a a point and shoot camera built in but if you want something a little better all of the supermarkets will oblige.
All supermarkets sell cards
All supermarkets sell clothing and underdungers.

The internet is responsible for undercutting lots of High Street retailers and they were victims of people going into the shops, trying various products and then after spending shop staff time and effort trying to make a sale, eventually losing the sale to the internet. Bye bye Jessops, but Blockbusters will lose out to online film delivery and losing custom to supermarkets.

If what each shop was re-regulated so that you couldn't stray too far from your core business e.g.pharmacists could only sell drugs and healthcare related products, electrical/electronics shops could only sell electrical/electronics and their related products, petrol stations sell fuel, oil and snacks, then smaller shops would claw back custom from supermarkets. This would put money in the pockets of the small business owner and would be spread around the community rather than going into the coffers of the supermarkets AND we would get more diverse High streets.

Make the supermarkets get back to their core business of groceries, not cameras, TV, pharmaceuticals, petrol et al

I'm not against supermarkets per se, they were allowed to expand into different areas and, like any good business, they exploited the new situation and have profitted, but the government needs to legislate to re-regulate to rejuvenate the High street as this would stimulate small business and money moving around locally, which would aid growth.

TheStone

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

I think this is still my fave Osborne clip, other than perhaps when he was booed by the whole Olympic stadium this summer.

And this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qjBec3fpBI

TheStone

EKE_38BPM wrote:

If what each shop was re-regulated so that you couldn't stray too far from your core business e.g.pharmacists could only sell drugs and healthcare related products, electrical/electronics shops could only sell electrical/electronics and their related products, petrol stations sell fuel, oil and snacks, then smaller shops would claw back custom from supermarkets. This would put money in the pockets of the small business owner and would be spread around the community rather than going into the coffers of the supermarkets AND we would get more diverse High streets.

Make the supermarkets get back to their core business of groceries, not cameras, TV, pharmaceuticals, petrol et al

That sounds like France. :shock:

sketchley

DonDaddyD wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Seriously though, everyone is broke, everything is expensive, no one is making anything and I thought the highstreet in Wimbledon looked barren until I went to Croydon - jeez.

Go to Raynes Park. Not far and supposedly it has the most occupied high street in the country or something. That'll cheer you up.

I went to Raynes Park, I looked for Woolworths, HMV, Game, Comet, Blockbuster, Jessops, JJB, Clinton Cards, Peacocks, Blacks, Barrets and La Senza. Couldn't find any of them.

There's is a rather nice brand new Waitrose though...