Ge 2017

[shagster]

regards national debt
0.96 trillion in april 2010
1.73 trillion in march 2017
not doubled but not far off in 7 years
yes i am ancient
at least JC had a manifesto to talk about - opinion
may had nothing - opinion
where are our enemies that we need nuclear weapons for?
what is an xbox
i might come up with some theories that may be deemed as BS, but not as many as some
i dont read every thread on here, life is too short, so if i miss a few things apologies, anyway golf needs to be played so only look at meal breaks when on shift
after all its only opinion right or wrong, yet i have seen no one prove that JC could not fund his ideology, but as i said at least he had something

 

[BristolMike]

regards national debt
0.96 trillion in april 2010
1.73 trillion in march 2017
not doubled but not far off in 7 years
yes i am ancient
at least JC had a manifesto to talk about - opinion
may had nothing - opinion
where are our enemies that we need nuclear weapons for?
what is an xbox
i might come up with some theories that may be deemed as BS, but not as many as some
i dont read every thread on here, life is too short, so if i miss a few things apologies, anyway golf needs to be played so only look at meal breaks when on shift
after all its only opinion right or wrong, yet i have seen no one prove that JC could not fund his ideology, but as i said at least he had something

your figures are completely flawed though....

in 2010 the deficit under labour was £151Bn or at around 10% of GDP. Last year the deficit was only £52bn or around 2-3% of current GDP. That is a huge reduction. It would have been impossible for the conservatives to immediately cut the deficit to £0 and its unrealistic to believe they could. What they are doing is slowly reducing it bringing us into a state where we would no longer be borrowing.

You shouldnt be be asking why has the national debt increase to that level, but wondering how bad it would have been with the reckless labour spending had they stayed in power.

 

[Foxholer]

regards national debt
0.96 trillion in april 2010
1.73 trillion in march 2017
not doubled...

Then kindly desist from stating that it has!

Thank you for admitting your error though!

And, of course, the Banking Crisis has had a huge influence on government attitudes to deficits/debt! It's still felt that the current levels of deficit/debt are acceptable compared to the alternatives! It wasn't those policies that the GE was actually fought over! In fact, I'm inclined to believe that the actual policies over which the election was fought will rapidly be forgotten!

 

[Foxholer]

your figures are completely flawed though....

in 2010 the deficit under labour was £151Bn or at around 10% of GDP. Last year the deficit was only £52bn or around 2-3% of current GDP. That is a huge reduction. It would have been impossible for the conservatives to immediately cut the deficit to £0 and its unrealistic to believe they could. What they are doing is slowly reducing it bringing us into a state where we would no longer be borrowing.

You shouldnt be be asking why has the national debt increase to that level, but wondering how bad it would have been with the reckless labour spending had they stayed in power.

Well I agree with all but the final paragraph - which is pure opinion/speculation!

If you refer to the graph in this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt#/media/File:UK_Debt_to_GDP_ratio.png

you should be able to realise that Labour actually reduced the deficit as a percentage of GDP immediately on being voted in in 1997! Ubder Conservatives, it had been increasing steadily! Even in 2007, after 6 years of slightly increasing %-age, it had not returned to the same percentage of Major's Conservatives!

It was only the International Banking Crisis of 2008 that triggered the, quite reasonable imo, 'Quantitative Easing', and other debt-dreating policies/exercises. While Labour happened to be the party in power, so was always going to get accused of mis-management, I'm pretty certain that the Conservatives would have adopted pretty similar policies!

It seems to me that Labour's 'Monkey on the Back' is supposed mis-management of 'the economy', while the Conservatives seem to be fraught with (forced) U-Turns!

 

[SocketRocket]

An F Wit...?

Thats the one

 

[SocketRocket]

Possibly a Rocket?

Maybe a Socket?

Or perhaps even a combo - specially after pub closing!

:rofl:

I was thinking a Foxhole or maybe a 'A' Hole

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Well I agree with all but the final paragraph - which is pure opinion/speculation!

If you refer to the graph in this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt#/media/File:UK_Debt_to_GDP_ratio.png

you should be able to realise that Labour actually reduced the deficit as a percentage of GDP immediately on being voted in in 1997! Ubder Conservatives, it had been increasing steadily! Even in 2007, after 6 years of slightly increasing %-age, it had not returned to the same percentage of Major's Conservatives!

It was only the International Banking Crisis of 2008 that triggered the, quite reasonable imo, 'Quantitative Easing', and other debt-dreating policies/exercises. While Labour happened to be the party in power, so was always going to get accused of mis-management, I'm pretty certain that the Conservatives would have adopted pretty similar policies!

It seems to me that Labour's 'Monkey on the Back' is supposed mis-management of 'the economy', while the Conservatives seem to be fraught with (forced) U-Turns!

Can you please refrain from mentioning any tory governments prior to Blair being elected, everyone knows Labour inherited a land of milk and honey

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Michael Gove back in the cabinet, the man who described the Good Friday Peace agreement as a "mortal stain" and a "humiliation" for the British Army.

In other news she's doing a deal with the DUP, at least they've now got a friend in the cabinet!

 

[SocketRocket]

 

[Tashyboy]

View attachment 22922

I think corbdrik may have a cunning plan master.

 

[chippa1909]

So, did May lie to the Queen when she said she could form a gevernment?

 

[PhilTheFragger]

No
She leads the largest party by far
She has first dibs

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The Supreme Chump could form a government without the DUP - but I doubt she'd get far far with it.

 

[SocketRocket]

The Supreme Chump could form a government without the DUP - but I doubt she'd get far far with it.

Crikey, thanks for the enlightenment, we would have never noticed

'Supreme Chump' Is that the new Christian speak for "Whatever is hurtful to you, do not do to any other person" :thup:

 

[bluewolf]

Where did you read that? I said the petition was a complete waste of time.

That doesn't answer the question......

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Crikey, thanks for the enlightenment, we would have never noticed

'Supreme Chump' Is that the new Christian speak for "Whatever is hurtful to you, do not do to any other person" :thup:

No. It's simply a reflection of the truth of the matter.

 

[SocketRocket]

That doesn't answer the question......

I see no correlation with the question and my statement. I suggested that the petition was a waste of time, I am saying that it will achieve nothing, just like every other petition that has been made on that web site. If you want to read into that statement that it means I have a particular view on a coalition between the DUP and Conservatives then you are wrong.

 

[SocketRocket]

No. It's simply a reflection of the truth of the matter.

Calling the PM a 'Supreme Chump' is an opinion, not the truth, the truth is not your opinion as a right.

 

[bluewolf]

I see no correlation with the question and my statement. I suggested that the petition was a waste of time, I am saying that it will achieve nothing, just like every other petition that has been made on that web site. If you want to read into that statement that it means I have a particular view on a coalition between the DUP and Conservatives then you are wrong.

I couldn't care less about the petition. I'm simply asking for your view on the proposed coalition....

 

[richy]

I see no correlation with the question and my statement. I suggested that the petition was a waste of time, I am saying that it will achieve nothing, just like every other petition that has been made on that web site. If you want to read into that statement that it means I have a particular view on a coalition between the DUP and Conservatives then you are wrong.

What about the petition against the Trump state visit? That seems to have achieved something.