LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?0
-
Bulk of govt spending is on stuff with a predictable economic outcome.surrey_commuter said:
You always allocate the £2trn to economically beneficial outcomesrick_chasey said:
I am optimistic that the value of propping the economy up is more valuable then the cost of servicing the debt over the entire period of said debt and there is no rational economics to suggest otherwise.surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
0 -
It's vouchers to spend in supermarkets, but parents need to feed their children in the school holidays like they usually have to.TheBigBean said:Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?
0 -
You're fecking kidding me right? Automatically assuming that just because someone is poor that they're an absolute wastrel?TheBigBean said:Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?
I qualified for free school meals when i was a kid. My mum was a single parent of 3 kids, working 3 jobs to keep the family afloat. She would not have dreamed of "wasting" tax payers money on something else if it was meant for feeding her kids. Most people are law abiding citizens, even the poor ones.
Welfare fraud in this country is minuscule, especially compared to the money lost from rich people avoiding tax.0 -
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance0 -
Not assuming anything. Asking a question.elbowloh said:
You're fecking kidding me right? Automatically assuming that just because someone is poor that they're an absolute wastrel?TheBigBean said:Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?
I qualified for free school meals when i was a kid. My mum was a single parent of 3 kids, working 3 jobs to keep the family afloat. She would not have dreamed of "wasting" tax payers money on something else if it was meant for feeding her kids. Most people are law abiding citizens, even the poor ones.
Welfare fraud in this country is minuscule, especially compared to the money lost from rich people avoiding tax.0 -
My understanding is that the shops cannot sell them fags or booze for the vouchers. However any quality or quantity of normal foods up to the voucher value would acceptable.TheBigBean said:Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?
0 -
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.1 -
Yeah normally they are for exactly that during term time. During holidays that stops and the parents who are genuinely struggling to feed their kids enough struggle even more. There are charities like Make Lunch who step into that gap a little and provide x free meals for kids over holidays.TheBigBean said:Ignorant question - I thought the whole point of free school meals is that they are in school and the kids therefore actually get a proper meal. How does it work in the summer holidays? What stops the parents wasting the money on something else?
I think there is a strong argument that those charities, and food banks, shouldn't need to exist and if those kids genuinely need free meals during term time, of course they need them outside of term time too.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.0 -
The government debt won't be repaid in the next 10 years though, so even if rates rise the cost of servicing the debt will rise significantly, and will need to be rebroked within the next 15 years.rick_chasey said:
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.0 -
Given that your posted on here since I asked but not replied, we will have to assume that there is no rational economics to support your optimism. Ready to be persuaded otherwise...Stevo_666 said:
Can we see the rational economics to support your optimism?rick_chasey said:
I am optimistic that the value of propping the economy up is more valuable then the cost of servicing the debt over the entire period of said debt and there is no rational economics to suggest otherwise.surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Firstly, you need to justify that rates will rise, secondly for debt service costs to increase the new debt has to be more expensive than the debt it is replacing. For example, when the 6% 2028 gilt expires, £20bn of debt at 6% will be replaced with the prevailing rates at the time.Dorset_Boy said:
The government debt won't be repaid in the next 10 years though, so even if rates rise the cost of servicing the debt will rise significantly, and will need to be rebroked within the next 15 years.rick_chasey said:
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.0 -
Look at inflation and gilt rates and tell me you would be mad to take that debt onStevo_666 said:
Given that your posted on here since I asked but not replied, we will have to assume that there is no rational economics to support your optimism. Ready to be persuaded otherwise...Stevo_666 said:
Can we see the rational economics to support your optimism?rick_chasey said:
I am optimistic that the value of propping the economy up is more valuable then the cost of servicing the debt over the entire period of said debt and there is no rational economics to suggest otherwise.surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
0 -
The debate economists are having is not about if the debt is too much or not (cost of all debt servicing is very low by historical standards) but if the fiscal support will be inflationary or not.
We’ve had a decade of low inflation. Might not last.0 -
I think you attached the wrong graphrick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance0 -
rick_chasey said:
The debate economists are having is not about if the debt is too much or not (cost of all debt servicing is very low by historical standards) but if the fiscal support will be inflationary or not.
We’ve had a decade of low inflation. Might not last.
And what % of total debt is index linked?0 -
Im sure that's fine for the short term but what about the long term? As mentioned many times, this is a long term issue as debt will not magically disappear or pay itself back.rick_chasey said:
Look at inflation and gilt rates and tell me you would be mad to take that debt onStevo_666 said:
Given that your posted on here since I asked but not replied, we will have to assume that there is no rational economics to support your optimism. Ready to be persuaded otherwise...Stevo_666 said:
Can we see the rational economics to support your optimism?rick_chasey said:
I am optimistic that the value of propping the economy up is more valuable then the cost of servicing the debt over the entire period of said debt and there is no rational economics to suggest otherwise.surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Also you have not addressed the question of how this spend props up the economy, i.e. yields more than the cost. Got any evidence for that?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
All true but you are betting everything on gilt rates never going back to anywhere near their historic levels.TheBigBean said:
Firstly, you need to justify that rates will rise, secondly for debt service costs to increase the new debt has to be more expensive than the debt it is replacing. For example, when the 6% 2028 gilt expires, £20bn of debt at 6% will be replaced with the prevailing rates at the time.Dorset_Boy said:
The government debt won't be repaid in the next 10 years though, so even if rates rise the cost of servicing the debt will rise significantly, and will need to be rebroked within the next 15 years.rick_chasey said:
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.0 -
You would be mad to take that debt on0
-
For ten years, people have been talking about long term rates going back to normal and yet even before covid 19, long term rates were at an all time low. As I said upthread, a 2060 gilt has a gross redemption rate of 0.7%, so no one is expecting rates to rise any time soon.surrey_commuter said:
All true but you are betting everything on gilt rates never going back to anywhere near their historic levels.TheBigBean said:
Firstly, you need to justify that rates will rise, secondly for debt service costs to increase the new debt has to be more expensive than the debt it is replacing. For example, when the 6% 2028 gilt expires, £20bn of debt at 6% will be replaced with the prevailing rates at the time.Dorset_Boy said:
The government debt won't be repaid in the next 10 years though, so even if rates rise the cost of servicing the debt will rise significantly, and will need to be rebroked within the next 15 years.rick_chasey said:
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.0 -
There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.0
-
I agree they are not expected to rise any time soon but gilt curves do shift. Nobody predicted this decade of ludicrously low rates and I don’t believe it will stay this way forever.TheBigBean said:
For ten years, people have been talking about long term rates going back to normal and yet even before covid 19, long term rates were at an all time low. As I said upthread, a 2060 gilt has a gross redemption rate of 0.7%, so no one is expecting rates to rise any time soon.surrey_commuter said:
All true but you are betting everything on gilt rates never going back to anywhere near their historic levels.TheBigBean said:
Firstly, you need to justify that rates will rise, secondly for debt service costs to increase the new debt has to be more expensive than the debt it is replacing. For example, when the 6% 2028 gilt expires, £20bn of debt at 6% will be replaced with the prevailing rates at the time.Dorset_Boy said:
The government debt won't be repaid in the next 10 years though, so even if rates rise the cost of servicing the debt will rise significantly, and will need to be rebroked within the next 15 years.rick_chasey said:
They’re unlikely to go that high again in the next decade unless there is rampant inflation in which case you’d have wished you borrowed more.Dorset_Boy said:
Where did I complain about the ERM situation? Get off your political agenda for once, it was not needed or wanted here.rick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance
It happened. some of us lived through it and had a mortgage to pay at the time.
Perhaps we learnt from the experience. Nothing we as individuals could do about it. But it highlights that events can take over and push the cost of borrowing upwards significantly in a short period of time.
History has a habit of almost repeating itself.
Historically we are at all time low interest rates going back over 400 years. This is not normal, even if it may appear normal to you given your age.
My hunch is that our problems will start with QE being discredited.0 -
kingstongraham said:
There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.
Strangely that is the one thing we are all agreed on. My argument is that we now live in a world of permanent budget deficits which means we start each crisis in an increasingly worse position.
In less than 20 years we have gone from Govt’s balancing the books over the lifetime of a Parliament to a position this Feb where after a decade of deficits Boris set out plans to borrow £60bn.
Maybe we should have a poll on what year we all think annual borrowing will fall below £100bn.
My prediction is ten years from now in the aftermath of the next financial crisis.0 -
We are already in a financial crisis, only borrowing is keeping it behind a veil.surrey_commuter said:
My prediction is ten years from now in the aftermath of the next financial crisis.kingstongraham said:There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.
We are going to be increasing that deficit for quite a while, or let the veil slip and wake up to how bad it is.
I agree that borrowing is required just now to keep afloat but we started with a leaky boat and they don't resolve themselves.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
permanent deficit is ok if the cost of servicing isn't rising, right?surrey_commuter said:kingstongraham said:There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.
Strangely that is the one thing we are all agreed on. My argument is that we now live in a world of permanent budget deficits which means we start each crisis in an increasingly worse position.
In less than 20 years we have gone from Govt’s balancing the books over the lifetime of a Parliament to a position this Feb where after a decade of deficits Boris set out plans to borrow £60bn.
Maybe we should have a poll on what year we all think annual borrowing will fall below £100bn.
My prediction is ten years from now in the aftermath of the next financial crisis.
I would moderate off the back of that, not some arbitrary feeling that the deficit is "big" or not because the numbers seem large.0 -
Couldn't find a gilt rate chart that went back long enough, and anyway, we all currently are led by what the fed does, within reason.surrey_commuter said:
I think you attached the wrong graphrick_chasey said:
No in short.Dorset_Boy said:
Was Rick born when we left the ERM and mortgage rates went from c.9% pa to c.17% pa within 9 months?surrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
I admire your optimism that it will remain at historic low levels for ever morerick_chasey said:
Cost of servicing debt is the figure you should be looking atsurrey_commuter said:Debt of 103% at it’s highest level since 1960, when interestingly growth was 6%.
Rick do you think we will never return to the typical BoE base rate of 4-7% pa over the 40 years preceeding 2008?
Long term rates are lower than what you grew up with
Not least with an independent boe.
Your ERM complaints are just poor Tory governance0 -
25% roughly - i'd add those bonds are trading at negative rates after inflationsurrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:The debate economists are having is not about if the debt is too much or not (cost of all debt servicing is very low by historical standards) but if the fiscal support will be inflationary or not.
We’ve had a decade of low inflation. Might not last.
And what % of total debt is index linked?0 -
But the deficit is rising, so the cost of servicing it is rising.rick_chasey said:
permanent deficit is ok if the cost of servicing isn't rising, right?surrey_commuter said:kingstongraham said:There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.
Strangely that is the one thing we are all agreed on. My argument is that we now live in a world of permanent budget deficits which means we start each crisis in an increasingly worse position.
In less than 20 years we have gone from Govt’s balancing the books over the lifetime of a Parliament to a position this Feb where after a decade of deficits Boris set out plans to borrow £60bn.
Maybe we should have a poll on what year we all think annual borrowing will fall below £100bn.
My prediction is ten years from now in the aftermath of the next financial crisis.
I would moderate off the back of that, not some arbitrary feeling that the deficit is "big" or not because the numbers seem large.
There will be a breaking point somewhere. Didn't you used to complain about passing the problems of today onto the young and future generations?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Not when it came to gov't debt.pblakeney said:
But the deficit is rising, so the cost of servicing it is rising.rick_chasey said:
permanent deficit is ok if the cost of servicing isn't rising, right?surrey_commuter said:kingstongraham said:There's a huge risk in not spending money to keep things afloat.
Strangely that is the one thing we are all agreed on. My argument is that we now live in a world of permanent budget deficits which means we start each crisis in an increasingly worse position.
In less than 20 years we have gone from Govt’s balancing the books over the lifetime of a Parliament to a position this Feb where after a decade of deficits Boris set out plans to borrow £60bn.
Maybe we should have a poll on what year we all think annual borrowing will fall below £100bn.
My prediction is ten years from now in the aftermath of the next financial crisis.
I would moderate off the back of that, not some arbitrary feeling that the deficit is "big" or not because the numbers seem large.
There will be a breaking point somewhere. Didn't you used to complain about passing the problems of today onto the young and future generations?
Look the calculation is cost of people on unemployment is bigger than cost of servicing debt at mega mega low rate.
So I get all the worrying about the future, but this is likely the better of two options for the future..... assuming that trade off is calculated correctly, but it's not super difficult to calculate
Most economists agree the UK recovery was choked off last time by the govt withdrawing stimulus support *too soon*.
I am a little worried the same thing is happening now because people are worried about big numbers they control (spending on furloughs etc) instead of big numbers they can't control (unemployment benefit)0
