2024 Election thread
Comments
-
He doesn't appear to have said that.rick_chasey said:
Sorry, more on debt than healthcare and pensions?!surrey_commuter said:
the second biggest expenditure is on servicing debt. It seems that borrowing as much as possible when rates were rock bottom was not a good ideajoeyhalloran said:Seems like the level of tax is doing the rounds this morning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66945729
What I don't understand is if "Next year, the government will collect upwards of £100bn more in tax compared to pre-2019 levels" and it's at a historic high, why is everything so censored ? NHS and (state) schools are underfunded, infrastructure projects scrapped, road quality gone to censored . Is it all going on pensioners? I understand inflation had to inflate tax take to keep up but £100bn seems like a lot.
Plus aging population means more goes on healthcare and pensions0 -
If ever an article didn't match the headline! The actual article gives some surprinsingly useful and accurate information and really isn't a guide to successfully object (more a guide on how planning works and the process for making a valid objection). Modern journalism is shitrick_chasey said:kingstongraham said:Look at that number for young people in the latest YouGov poll:
0 -
yep, it has edged past pensions but still behind healthcare,Pross said:
He doesn't appear to have said that.rick_chasey said:
Sorry, more on debt than healthcare and pensions?!surrey_commuter said:
the second biggest expenditure is on servicing debt. It seems that borrowing as much as possible when rates were rock bottom was not a good ideajoeyhalloran said:Seems like the level of tax is doing the rounds this morning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66945729
What I don't understand is if "Next year, the government will collect upwards of £100bn more in tax compared to pre-2019 levels" and it's at a historic high, why is everything so censored ? NHS and (state) schools are underfunded, infrastructure projects scrapped, road quality gone to censored . Is it all going on pensioners? I understand inflation had to inflate tax take to keep up but £100bn seems like a lot.
Plus aging population means more goes on healthcare and pensions
@rick_chasey do you acknowledge that maxing out borrowing every year in the expectation that interest rates would stay low forever was not such a good idea.1 -
Yeah if you don’t grow you’re gonna be in the sh!tsurrey_commuter said:
yep, it has edged past pensions but still behind healthcare,Pross said:
He doesn't appear to have said that.rick_chasey said:
Sorry, more on debt than healthcare and pensions?!surrey_commuter said:
the second biggest expenditure is on servicing debt. It seems that borrowing as much as possible when rates were rock bottom was not a good ideajoeyhalloran said:Seems like the level of tax is doing the rounds this morning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66945729
What I don't understand is if "Next year, the government will collect upwards of £100bn more in tax compared to pre-2019 levels" and it's at a historic high, why is everything so censored ? NHS and (state) schools are underfunded, infrastructure projects scrapped, road quality gone to censored . Is it all going on pensioners? I understand inflation had to inflate tax take to keep up but £100bn seems like a lot.
Plus aging population means more goes on healthcare and pensions
@rick_chasey do you acknowledge that maxing out borrowing every year in the expectation that interest rates would stay low forever was not such a good idea.0 -
Is t extra borrowing fine as long as it used to grow GDP at a faster/equal rate? Rather than given to mates of Tory MPs for dodgy COVID supplies and the oil lobby?0
-
Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc0 -
Debt is at record levels, so you would you not expect strong growth as a result?rick_chasey said:
Yeah if you don’t grow you’re gonna be in the sh!tsurrey_commuter said:
yep, it has edged past pensions but still behind healthcare,Pross said:
He doesn't appear to have said that.rick_chasey said:
Sorry, more on debt than healthcare and pensions?!surrey_commuter said:
the second biggest expenditure is on servicing debt. It seems that borrowing as much as possible when rates were rock bottom was not a good ideajoeyhalloran said:Seems like the level of tax is doing the rounds this morning.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66945729
What I don't understand is if "Next year, the government will collect upwards of £100bn more in tax compared to pre-2019 levels" and it's at a historic high, why is everything so censored ? NHS and (state) schools are underfunded, infrastructure projects scrapped, road quality gone to censored . Is it all going on pensioners? I understand inflation had to inflate tax take to keep up but £100bn seems like a lot.
Plus aging population means more goes on healthcare and pensions
@rick_chasey do you acknowledge that maxing out borrowing every year in the expectation that interest rates would stay low forever was not such a good idea.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
But according to your logic, more debt is needed to drive economic growth, isn't it?rick_chasey said:Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Well that was the case 10 years ago now but the situation has changed.Stevo_666 said:
But according to your logic, more debt is needed to drive economic growth, isn't it?rick_chasey said:Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc
The drive to cut debt was austerity.
We can now all agree that that is a failure, as the premise of austerity was to reduce the debt burden and now look where we are.
I maintain the counter factual that if Britain and Europe had embarked on genuine counter cyclical spending like the US did, the economies would all be substantially bigger.
However, a decade and a half of no growth and the Brexit/Truss episode has eroded the trust of the British government by investors which makes counter cyclical spending much harder, as investors won’t give you the same leeway to embark on it.
So 15 years on there are fewer levers to pull….as a result of poor mismanagement for a decade and a half.0 -
The manifesto is being written by your crazy uncle on Facebook
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Its a war on the war on motorists.0
-
It's so depressing. In an incredibly lopsided 'war' of cars Vs everything else he has gone full throttle on ensuring the car is the only option with no other choice!tailwindhome said:The manifesto is being written by your crazy uncle on Facebook
Also, what happened to devolution of power? Regions can do whatever they like but can't make it safe or convenient for people to not drive.0 -
Cracking down on inconsiderate driving you say? More speed cameras, more enforcement officers etc?0 -
Does suck for us cyclists. All this rhetoric just gives the bellends more reason to give us grief.
And give us grief they f@cking well do.0 -
Isn't that because of the half a trillion quid spent on COVID and Putin/inflation? I will add yet again the Lib Dems (Clegg) signed up for austerity too.rick_chasey said:
Well that was the case 10 years ago now but the situation has changed.Stevo_666 said:
But according to your logic, more debt is needed to drive economic growth, isn't it?rick_chasey said:Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc
The drive to cut debt was austerity.
We can now all agree that that is a failure, as the premise of austerity was to reduce the debt burden and now look where we are.
I maintain the counter factual that if Britain and Europe had embarked on genuine counter cyclical spending like the US did, the economies would all be substantially bigger.
However, a decade and a half of no growth and the Brexit/Truss episode has eroded the trust of the British government by investors which makes counter cyclical spending much harder, as investors won’t give you the same leeway to embark on it.
So 15 years on there are fewer levers to pull….as a result of poor mismanagement for a decade and a half.1 -
What does unfair enforcement mean?0
-
You know, the dangerous things everyone does but only get caught occasionally.First.Aspect said:What does unfair enforcement mean?
Maybe make it more fair by enforcing them more?0 -
Long term travel plans = Cars.
Fück carbon neutral, or the infrastructure, we want seats.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 -
Or more fair by never enforcing them instead of only occasionally enforcing them?0
-
Well that does seem to be the implication.joeyhalloran said:Or more fair by never enforcing them instead of only occasionally enforcing them?
Not sure which ones that applies to. People seem annoyed about getting done for speeding at night, or driving in a bus lane when there's no bus in it.
0 -
Need I remind you we’d all be roughly 20% richer had we had 2% growth over 10 years rather than nothingfocuszing723 said:
Isn't that because of the half a trillion quid spent on COVID and Putin/inflation? I will add yet again the Lib Dems (Clegg) signed up for austerity too.rick_chasey said:
Well that was the case 10 years ago now but the situation has changed.Stevo_666 said:
But according to your logic, more debt is needed to drive economic growth, isn't it?rick_chasey said:Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc
The drive to cut debt was austerity.
We can now all agree that that is a failure, as the premise of austerity was to reduce the debt burden and now look where we are.
I maintain the counter factual that if Britain and Europe had embarked on genuine counter cyclical spending like the US did, the economies would all be substantially bigger.
However, a decade and a half of no growth and the Brexit/Truss episode has eroded the trust of the British government by investors which makes counter cyclical spending much harder, as investors won’t give you the same leeway to embark on it.
So 15 years on there are fewer levers to pull….as a result of poor mismanagement for a decade and a half.0 -
22.9% compounded.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 -
Hey, don't have a go at me X Clegg and the Lib Dems.rick_chasey said:
Need I remind you we’d all be roughly 20% richer had we had 2% growth over 10 years rather than nothingfocuszing723 said:
Isn't that because of the half a trillion quid spent on COVID and Putin/inflation? I will add yet again the Lib Dems (Clegg) signed up for austerity too.rick_chasey said:
Well that was the case 10 years ago now but the situation has changed.Stevo_666 said:
But according to your logic, more debt is needed to drive economic growth, isn't it?rick_chasey said:Yeah the political reality is unless you grow the economy you’re gonna end up with more debt.
So that’s why austerity is so bad etc
The drive to cut debt was austerity.
We can now all agree that that is a failure, as the premise of austerity was to reduce the debt burden and now look where we are.
I maintain the counter factual that if Britain and Europe had embarked on genuine counter cyclical spending like the US did, the economies would all be substantially bigger.
However, a decade and a half of no growth and the Brexit/Truss episode has eroded the trust of the British government by investors which makes counter cyclical spending much harder, as investors won’t give you the same leeway to embark on it.
So 15 years on there are fewer levers to pull….as a result of poor mismanagement for a decade and a half.0 -
One thing though after the financial crisis, did the Government have to go down the austerity route to protect the countries credit rating, IR payments on the hideous debt?0
-
No, they went down the road of austerity and increasing the debt.focuszing723 said:One thing though after the financial crisis, did the Government have to go down the austerity route to protect the countries credit rating, IR payments on the hideous debt?
Without any proportional growth.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 -
I'm not saying the Lib Dems made the right choice just seeing it without the luxury of hindsight as to why Nick Clegg signed up to austerity.pblakeney said:
No, they went down the road of austerity and increasing the debt.focuszing723 said:One thing though after the financial crisis, did the Government have to go down the austerity route to protect the countries credit rating, IR payments on the hideous debt?
Without any proportional growth.0 -
I seem to remember lots of commentary at the time saying that's exactly when governments need to spend. Other countries certainly seemed to handle it better than the UK given the 13 years of zero growth0
-
