On a previous thread he said that: "Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
When in fact my original post made it clear that what I found 'repulsive' was the attitude of those whose campaign against sexual violence against women was dialled up or down depending on who the perpetrators were.
That he deliberately misquoted you shows how pathetic he is.
I wasn't quoting but interpreting as I made clear. This is what she said.......
"But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course)."
And this was my interpretation. If my interpretation was wrong I apologize but I'm struggling to interpret it differently
"Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
BBC overplaying the death of Wogan - very sad obviously, but the world really didn't stop.
I wish they wouldn't do this sort of thing. Claire Balding being diagnosed with something or other managing to outshine the major issues of the day was another example.
Newspapers don't run front page news stories on the death of their journalists.
They overplayed the deaths of Bowie and Rickman as well, although so did most of the papers.
''But, then, he just called the whole thing off. All of it. He didn't taper or revise it, he just called the whole thing off. Weird.''
Its not weird if you see it in the context of an all-encompassing desire to be the next leader of the tory party.
I must admit, I am tickled that one of the things that has most damaged him recently has been the Google tax.
I think he genuinely thought he'd gain some political credit by managing to extract some tax from them.
He'd probably have been better off letting sleeping dogs lie.
He would have been better off doing what other countries do, and demanding everyone else in the EU act on tax before he did! Still better than Corbyn though by about 10 to 1
The government have been working on tax avoidance ever since they came to power. It tickles me how everyone puts their prejudice onto every event. Does anyone know anything about google, about its taxes, about any taxes? No they, we, you, me, know zilch. But dislike Osborne - ? Then whatever happens its wrong. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-by-hmrc-on-tax-evasion-and-the-hsbc-suisse-data-leak
BBC overplaying the death of Wogan - very sad obviously, but the world really didn't stop.
I wish they wouldn't do this sort of thing. Claire Balding being diagnosed with something or other managing to outshine the major issues of the day was another example.
Newspapers don't run front page news stories on the death of their journalists.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession.
so he'll abolish boom and bust ?
plus ca change
No, there will be a recession at some point. Whether that is after or before we get back to balance remains to be seen.
yes there will, and when it arrives the fact that Osborne hasn't enacted sufficient economic reforms will see the deficit rocket back in to the stratosphere.
I don't think so. We will return to deficit no doubt but much of the structural deficit has been dealt with and will not return.
No seriously it hasn't, No has the structural imbalance in the economy been dealt with. Osborne is simply spinning it as he goes along.
That's just nonsense. The restraint in public spending since 2010 has brought public expenditure much more in line with the tax base. The changes to public sector pensions will have a dramatic effect on the strain they will have on public finances going forward and the worst of the PFI schemes have been renegotiated or run down.
We are a long way from being out of the woods and we will be carrying roughly double the level of debt we had before but we are in a much better place.
Over 50% of Government spending of £742bn is on social protection and healthcare. Pensions make up the vast majority of the former and 80% of an individual's lifetime NHS spending is in the last 6 months of their life.
I want a decent, respectable retirement for all our elderly. However, it should be noted that's where all the money goes and it isn't an investment.
Personally, I would de-link the triple-lock and couple states pensions to average life expectancy minus 10 years (to be reviewed every 10 years going forwards) and encourage individual health savings accounts and private pension savings.
That would be sustainable in the long-term IMHO.
Shouldn't it be ratio based? The eldest 20% of the population; that way the ratio between workers and non-workers remains constant over time.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession.
so he'll abolish boom and bust ?
plus ca change
No, there will be a recession at some point. Whether that is after or before we get back to balance remains to be seen.
yes there will, and when it arrives the fact that Osborne hasn't enacted sufficient economic reforms will see the deficit rocket back in to the stratosphere.
I don't think so. We will return to deficit no doubt but much of the structural deficit has been dealt with and will not return.
No seriously it hasn't, No has the structural imbalance in the economy been dealt with. Osborne is simply spinning it as he goes along.
That's just nonsense. The restraint in public spending since 2010 has brought public expenditure much more in line with the tax base. The changes to public sector pensions will have a dramatic effect on the strain they will have on public finances going forward and the worst of the PFI schemes have been renegotiated or run down.
We are a long way from being out of the woods and we will be carrying roughly double the level of debt we had before but we are in a much better place.
Over 50% of Government spending of £742bn is on social protection and healthcare. Pensions make up the vast majority of the former and 80% of an individual's lifetime NHS spending is in the last 6 months of their life.
I want a decent, respectable retirement for all our elderly. However, it should be noted that's where all the money goes and it isn't an investment.
Personally, I would de-link the triple-lock and couple states pensions to average life expectancy minus 10 years (to be reviewed every 10 years going forwards) and encourage individual health savings accounts and private pension savings.
That would be sustainable in the long-term IMHO.
Shouldn't it be ratio based? The eldest 20% of the population; that way the ratio between workers and non-workers remains constant over time.
Hmm.. interesting idea. I like it.
Interesting in theory. In practice under a Labour government would it not just encourage unlimited immigration to bring down the retirement age? "Vote Labour and retire early!"
The Chancellor's position on tax credits was truly bizarre. I still don't understand it, and perhaps he doesn't too. But I have a theory.
IIRC, he forced it through as a statutory instrument to allow a discrete vote in the HoC when he could have packaged it up with the Budget and a Finance Bill. Presumably, he did that to create a dividing line with Labour. All the reports at the time were of how little sympathy Osborne had with the welfare budget, and the Spectator pointed out he tended to 'sneer' at those on it.
But, still: he won that HoC vote. And more than once. Then, the Lords threw it out, not by a big majority, which was a break of constitutional convention. But the motion was actually for full transitional protection for a minimum of three years, not a total rejection.
So, we expected a sensible modification and taper, which I'd been arguing for all along, as the original proposal was too harsh. And I failed to understand why Osborne hadn't done it all along. If it had been reasonable, it would have passed the Lords, even as a statutory instrument.
But, then, he just called the whole thing off. All of it. He didn't taper or revise it, he just called the whole thing off. Weird.
Personally, I think he did this *all* of this in response to the election of Corbyn, whereas previously he was expecting Burnham, and the Lords rejection and Tory MPs jitters were just cover. He didn't expect the backlash he did get over the cuts and, when he did, he realised it was now a political liability - so junked the whole thing and started to look for other groups to victimise. Ones that didn't squeal so much and jeopardise his future political ambitions. And he doesn't really care who or where.
It tells me both his emotional and political antenna are way off. And he just cares about political dividing lines and winning.
But you already knew that.
He's horrible.
Osborne as Tory leader is an election loser if Labour replace the idiot Corbyn with someone half decent.
Like who? And what would that do to the labour membership? labour are stuck in a left wing rut. Its laughable - the blind vindictive ignorance thats displayed by people venting their anti Osborne prejudices. Never mind finding someone half decent to replace Corbyn, who is half decent to be an alternative to Osborne?
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
Wow! We all knew the cyclists were on whatever, but I'd always assumed the bikes themselves went through a scrutineering process the same as in motorsports. Are there any sports left that aren't corrupt?
On a previous thread he said that: "Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
When in fact my original post made it clear that what I found 'repulsive' was the attitude of those whose campaign against sexual violence against women was dialled up or down depending on who the perpetrators were.
That he deliberately misquoted you shows how pathetic he is.
I wasn't quoting but interpreting as I made clear. This is what she said.......
"But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course)."
And this was my interpretation. If my interpretation was wrong I apologize but I'm struggling to interpret it differently
"Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
It is of interest to note that under the last Labour government, a determined effort was made (largely successful) to prevent a large group of people claiming asylum in this country. The people in question were undoubtedly persecuted to the point where the relevant UN conventions applied.
The reason they were not wanted by Labour was - their race. This was because their racial group was assumed have social attitudes that were unacceptable. Assumed as a group....
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
Wow! We all knew the cyclists were on whatever, but I'd always assumed the bikes themselves went through a scrutineering process the same as in motorsports. Are there any sports left that aren't corrupt?
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
Wow! We all knew the cyclists were on whatever, but I'd always assumed the bikes themselves went through a scrutineering process the same as in motorsports. Are there any sports left that aren't corrupt?
Snooker. Bowls. Darts.
Snooker and darts have had issues with drugs - stuff to reduce natural hand shake etc.
On a previous thread he said that: "Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
When in fact my original post made it clear that what I found 'repulsive' was the attitude of those whose campaign against sexual violence against women was dialled up or down depending on who the perpetrators were.
That he deliberately misquoted you shows how pathetic he is.
I wasn't quoting but interpreting as I made clear. This is what she said.......
"But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course)."
And this was my interpretation. If my interpretation was wrong I apologize but I'm struggling to interpret it differently
"Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
It is of interest to note that under the last Labour government, a determined effort was made (largely successful) to prevent a large group of people claiming asylum in this country. The people in question were undoubtedly persecuted to the point where the relevant UN conventions applied.
The reason they were not wanted by Labour was - their race. This was because their racial group was assumed have social attitudes that were unacceptable. Assumed as a group....
Interesting, isn't it....
Little that the last Labour government did surprises me. Which group are you talking about?
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
Wow! We all knew the cyclists were on whatever, but I'd always assumed the bikes themselves went through a scrutineering process the same as in motorsports. Are there any sports left that aren't corrupt?
''But, then, he just called the whole thing off. All of it. He didn't taper or revise it, he just called the whole thing off. Weird.''
Its not weird if you see it in the context of an all-encompassing desire to be the next leader of the tory party.
I must admit, I am tickled that one of the things that has most damaged him recently has been the Google tax.
I think he genuinely thought he'd gain some political credit by managing to extract some tax from them.
He'd probably have been better off letting sleeping dogs lie.
He would have been better off doing what other countries do, and demanding everyone else in the EU act on tax before he did! Still better than Corbyn though by about 10 to 1
The government have been working on tax avoidance ever since they came to power. It tickles me how everyone puts their prejudice onto every event. Does anyone know anything about google, about its taxes, about any taxes? No they, we, you, me, know zilch. But dislike Osborne - ? Then whatever happens its wrong. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-by-hmrc-on-tax-evasion-and-the-hsbc-suisse-data-leak
If you look at the figures behind the figures that the loony types wave around concerning the "tax gap", the biggest area of "tax loss" is errr.... Pensions and ISAs. In other words, the biggest amount of money that people are not paying in tax (but might have) is due to the stuff we *should* be doing...
I don't think it was illegal to be registered to vote at more than one location as long as one didn't actually vote twice. A lot of students were registered in more than one place.
Is a significant chunk of this 800K not going to be students who used to have double registrations at home and their place of study (only allowed to use 1 of course) and now don't? The fall in high student towns is consistent with that. It will mean a rebalancing from cities with lots of universities to the rest of the country but I suspect the effect will be at the margins.
Probably a lot of double registrations, people registering at second homes etc.
Unless voter fraud was at Northern Ireland levels - remember when Gerry Adams got whinny because 100k voters got culled from the list? The response from a very brave election official was that anyone who was disenfranchised could call him personally to fix the problem.... Strangely, never mentioned again....
In the case of council elections you can even vote twice (as long as you are registered in separate council areas.
The only question, then, is whether one of the also-rans will have a great Iowa caucus.
Rubio? Only one field office in Iowa Kasich? Maybe Bush? Hmmm...
Once again Trump looks like the big beast the others cross at their peril. I think he has this.
I agree. My original position was that he was underpriced for the presidency relative to his chance of getting the Republican nomination. I now think he's underpriced for both
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession.
so he'll abolish boom and bust ?
plus ca change
We've long past the point where any single country and _particularly_ any single politician can do much to control the economy. We're riding the log flume. Osborne hasn't done badly, but it's highly likely that he's running out of road.
Cheap commodities are balanced against the Chinese slowdown - but I don't think anyone can forecast even the next twelve months.
George has certainly been lucky so far; I'm sure he's nothing like as arrogant as Brown was - for all our sakes I hope he continues to be lucky.
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
Wow! We all knew the cyclists were on whatever, but I'd always assumed the bikes themselves went through a scrutineering process the same as in motorsports. Are there any sports left that aren't corrupt?
On a previous thread he said that: "Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
When in fact my original post made it clear that what I found 'repulsive' was the attitude of those whose campaign against sexual violence against women was dialled up or down depending on who the perpetrators were.
That he deliberately misquoted you shows how pathetic he is.
.... inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course)."
And this was my interpretation. If my interpretation was wrong I apologize but I'm struggling to interpret it differently
"Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
It is of interest to note that under the last Labour government, a determined effort was made (largely successful) to prevent a large group of people claiming asylum in this country. The people in question were undoubtedly persecuted to the point where the relevant UN conventions applied.
The reason they were not wanted by Labour was - their race. This was because their racial group was assumed have social attitudes that were unacceptable. Assumed as a group....
Interesting, isn't it....
Little that the last Labour government did surprises me. Which group are you talking about?
White Zimbabweans. An ex of mine works in immigration law (first generation African immigrant herself) - she worked on a number of cases. Apparently "special protocols" were put in place when Mugabe started his war on the white farmers. These instructed British immigration officials to deny asylum and to prevent in any way possible immigration from Zimbabwe.
Comically, the people on the ground (apparently they employ quite a few Zimbabweans to work in the visa offices etc) misunderstood and started applying the new rules to everyone - including blacks. That had to be fixed...
One of the rules that was used for this purpose was a declaration that serving in the British Army didn't mean you had any connection with Britain. Because this rule was promulgated world wide, this led to the comic incident where the Nepalese winner of a Victoria Cross was told that he had no connection with Britain.
The only question, then, is whether one of the also-rans will have a great Iowa caucus.
Rubio? Only one field office in Iowa Kasich? Maybe Bush? Hmmm...
Once again Trump looks like the big beast the others cross at their peril. I think he has this.
I agree. My original position was that he was underpriced for the presidency relative to his chance of getting the Republican nomination. I now think he's underpriced for both
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession.
so he'll abolish boom and bust ?
plus ca change
No, there will be a recession at some point. Whether that is after or before we get back to balance remains to be seen.
yes there will, and when it arrives the fact that Osborne hasn't enacted sufficient economic reforms will see the deficit rocket back in to the stratosphere.
I don't think so. We will return to deficit no doubt but much of the structural deficit has been dealt with and will not return.
No seriously it hasn't, No has the structural imbalance in the economy been dealt with. Osborne is simply spinning it as he goes along.
That's just nonsense. The restraint in public spending since 2010 has brought public expenditure much more in line with the tax base. The changes to public sector pensions will have a dramatic effect on the strain they will have on public finances going forward and the worst of the PFI schemes have been renegotiated or run down.
We are a long way from being out of the woods and we will be carrying roughly double the level of debt we had before but we are in a much better place.
Over 50% of Government spending of £742bn is on social protection and healthcare. Pensions make up the vast majority of the former and 80% of an individual's lifetime NHS spending is in the last 6 months of their life.
I want a decent, respectable retirement for all our elderly. However, it should be noted that's where all the money goes and it isn't an investment.
Personally, I would de-link the triple-lock and couple states pensions to average life expectancy minus 10 years (to be reviewed every 10 years going forwards) and encourage individual health savings accounts and private pension savings.
That would be sustainable in the long-term IMHO.
It will take the baby boomers dying off to have a sensible discussion about state provision for OAPs.
The Financial Times had an excellent graph showing the transfer of wealth from the young to the old that exactly follows the baby boomer generation
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14. By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget. In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. " Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
For those who might be interested the IEA here also quote ''In 2010, Osborne laid out spending plans he forecast would reduce the overall ‘structural deficit’ to 0.8 per cent of GDP by 2014-15. '' note the words 'structural deficit'.
BBC overplaying the death of Wogan - very sad obviously, but the world really didn't stop.
I wish they wouldn't do this sort of thing. Claire Balding being diagnosed with something or other managing to outshine the major issues of the day was another example.
Newspapers don't run front page news stories on the death of their journalists.
They overplayed the deaths of Bowie and Rickman as well, although so did most of the papers.
There are many more to come. There was a huge explosion of popular culture in the 60s and 70s and well, now those stars are in their 60s and 70s.
The LibDems must be getting seriously concerned that they're showing no improvement even with the Corbyistas running wild.
Boundary changes could be an extinction event for LibDem MPs.
The 9-4 Mr Meeks suggested on sub 8.5 seats at GE2020 might well be looking like a money purchase in a few years/
Trying to remember the effects of the proposed boundary changes of 2011 on LibDem seats:
Sheffield Hallam - chopped up, Clegg likely to stand down (which might help the LibDems) Leeds NW - chopped up Carshalton - chopped up Westmoreland - ??? Norfolk N - ??? Southport - ??? 4 way marginal perhaps Ceredigon - ??? 3 way marginal perhaps O&S - no change ? but MP has issues
How much chance of LibDem gains are there ?
Cambridge is probably the best, especially if Huppert stands again, maybe something in the Eastbourne / Lewes area ?
The only question, then, is whether one of the also-rans will have a great Iowa caucus.
Rubio? Only one field office in Iowa Kasich? Maybe Bush? Hmmm...
In 2015, Labour had a great ground war. It did not matter. Rubio and Trump will be testing the theory that a targeted campaign or great air war respectively can overcome this.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
That's clearly the endgame. If you were an EU head of state, you might be asking why it is your problem that we the British have a welfare system that has practically zero contributory principle and acts like a magnet for unskilled workers, who you are glad to get rid of as it reduces your unemployment problems.
The LibDems must be getting seriously concerned that they're showing no improvement even with the Corbyistas running wild.
Boundary changes could be an extinction event for LibDem MPs.
The 9-4 Mr Meeks suggested on sub 8.5 seats at GE2020 might well be looking like a money purchase in a few years/
How much chance of LibDem gains are there ?
Not much if they struggle to even match the national share they got last time. East Dunbartonshire? I know, it's the LDs and Scotland and the SNP, but it had the lowest LD drop in vote share (even as the Lab share collapsed) and so is within a few percent of taking it back.
How is Twickenham affected by the proposed changes? That's another one with a small Con majority which could be overturned in the event of even a slight LD revival.
I should think O&S will get a different candidate than Carmichael - the only reason he probably stuck it out is they would definitely have lost it now. So it's a question of if the issues there hinder the next LD candidate or the place returns to type and sticks with the party they've stuck with in one form or another for 65 years.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
The impression that British people will lose out on benefits in order to prevent foreigners getting them as well will not, I think, be an easy sell to the public as a reason to stay in the EU. Most people are in favour of restricting benefits in general, I believe, but as we saw with tax credits, some lines upset most people regardless.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
You really don't like Osborne's predictions being measured against results do you.
Unfortunately for those of us in the real world we'll be paying extra taxes for the rest of our lives to pay back all Osborne's extra borrowing to buy votes.
For you residents of planet cheerleader let me tell you how Osborne has dealt with the real world:
Growth - fail Borrowing - fail Debt - fail Unemployment - initial failure followed by success Inflation - initial failure followed by success Rebalancing the economy - fail 'March of the Makers' - fail Trillion pound export target - fail Home ownership / house prices - fail
David Mellor yesterday "I feel like voting out simply because I am not going to be conned by that man,borrowing Chamberlain's overcoat, stumbling down the plane's steps waving a piece of paper signed by Juncker, claiming this is a triumph for Britain," Mellor fumed.
Chamberlain was misguided, at worst a dupe.
Cameron knows exactly what he is doing - more Quisling than Chamberlain
The Chancellor's position on tax credits was truly bizarre. I still don't understand it, and perhaps he doesn't too. But I have a theory.
But, still: he won that HoC vote. And more than once. Then, the Lords threw it out, not by a big majority, which was a break of constitutional convention. But the motion was actually for full transitional protection for a minimum of three years, not a total rejection.
So, we expected a sensible modification and taper, which I'd been arguing for all along, as the original proposal was too harsh. And I failed to understand why Osborne hadn't done it all along. If it had been reasonable, it would have passed the Lords, even as a statutory instrument.
But, then, he just called the whole thing off. All of it. He didn't taper or revise it, he just called the whole thing off. Weird.
Personally, I think he did this *all* of this in response to the election of Corbyn, whereas previously he was expecting Burnham, and the Lords rejection and Tory MPs jitters were just cover. He didn't expect the backlash he did get over the cuts and, when he did, he realised it was now a political liability - so junked the whole thing and started to look for other groups to victimise. Ones that didn't squeal so much and jeopardise his future political ambitions. And he doesn't really care who or where.
It tells me both his emotional and political antenna are way off. And he just cares about political dividing lines and winning.
But you already knew that.
He's horrible.
Osborne as Tory leader is an election loser if Labour replace the idiot Corbyn with someone half decent.
Like who? And what would that do to the labour membership? labour are stuck in a left wing rut. Its laughable - the blind vindictive ignorance thats displayed by people venting their anti Osborne prejudices. Never mind finding someone half decent to replace Corbyn, who is half decent to be an alternative to Osborne?
Is that you George?
The "there's no alternative" line is peddled a lot Squeaky's fanboys.
It's nonsense of course, in the same complacent way that Osborne thinks he can do as he wishes, because no one sensible will dare vote for Labour or Corbyn. He comes a cropper should the lunatic be replaced by someone else, and let's face it any successor will look pretty good after what's been before them. And disaffected Tories can simply don't bother to vote at all.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
The impression that British people will lose out on benefits in order to prevent foreigners getting them as well will not, I think, be an easy sell to the public as a reason to stay in the EU. Most people are in favour of restricting benefits in general, I believe, but as we saw with tax credits, some lines upset most people regardless.
I can't see much of a fuss being kicked up over the under-3s.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
As we are on Burns weekend I should point out that the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley, An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain. It is entirely possible that things will go awry but it is a mistake to think that the Chancellor has to make lots of new, difficult decisions to keep us on the current track. If he wants more money to change things around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Extra money in the economy due to QE has lead more people to buy chinese tat and this is the basis of our growth ?
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
The impression that British people will lose out on benefits in order to prevent foreigners getting them as well will not, I think, be an easy sell to the public as a reason to stay in the EU. Most people are in favour of restricting benefits in general, I believe, but as we saw with tax credits, some lines upset most people regardless.
It would affect hardly anybody. Most people have lived here for about 18 years before claiming benefits. Brits already have to take the "habitual residency test" if they have recently been out of the country. If your benefit qualification rules are no longer appropriate in a global economy, surely you change them.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of s around he does but the current rebalancing is already planned out.
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Employment is about the only credible thing on that list.
Growth is all about picking the year,you appear to forget we have had the slowest recovery ever. Our current growth targets are all being shaved back and the bits of the economy we need to grow ( manufacturing and construction ) were both in recession last year. If he stopped borrowing there would be no "growth".
Inflation is low across the world due to falling oil and commodity prices, nothing to do with GO he's just sat in the chair when it happened.
And the reason the BOP is fked is because much of it is structural and he has done nothing to on shore the structural gaps, So no it won;t go down, it will just get bigger.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
The impression that British people will lose out on benefits in order to prevent foreigners getting them as well will not, I think, be an easy sell to the public as a reason to stay in the EU. Most people are in favour of restricting benefits in general, I believe, but as we saw with tax credits, some lines upset most people regardless.
It would affect hardly anybody. Most people have lived here for about 18 years before claiming benefits. Brits already have to take the "habitual residency test" if they have recently been out of the country. If your benefit qualification rules are no longer appropriate in a global economy, surely you change them.
I'm not against it. But whether it will actually affect anybody at all is pretty immaterial as to whether it would cause a fuss. It might not, but sometimes the public just reacts against perceived unfairness, whether or not it is in fact unfair or not.
The LibDems must be getting seriously concerned that they're showing no improvement even with the Corbyistas running wild.
Boundary changes could be an extinction event for LibDem MPs.
The 9-4 Mr Meeks suggested on sub 8.5 seats at GE2020 might well be looking like a money purchase in a few years/
Trying to remember the effects of the proposed boundary changes of 2011 on LibDem seats:
Sheffield Hallam - chopped up, Clegg likely to stand down (which might help the LibDems) Leeds NW - chopped up Carshalton - chopped up Westmoreland - ??? Norfolk N - ??? Southport - ??? 4 way marginal perhaps Ceredigon - ??? 3 way marginal perhaps O&S - no change ? but MP has issues
How much chance of LibDem gains are there ?
Cambridge is probably the best, especially if Huppert stands again, maybe something in the Eastbourne / Lewes area ?
My friend - who is a member of the Labour Party in Cambridge - told me that if he'd realised it was going to be close, he's have voted for Huppert!
I would have thought the LibDems will hold Norfolk North, O&S (with a new candidate), Westmoreland, and Ceridgion.
The whole of South West London will be very interesting. Not least because there are basically four marginals there: Carshalton, Sutton & Cheam, Twickenham and Kingston. The way it is carved up could result in zero, one or two seats. Personally, I think that Cable knocked three to four points off the LibDem score in Twickenham, so any LD revival could help them there.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
The impression that British people will lose out on benefits in order to prevent foreigners getting them as well will not, I think, be an easy sell to the public as a reason to stay in the EU. Most people are in favour of restricting benefits in general, I believe, but as we saw with tax credits, some lines upset most people regardless.
It would affect hardly anybody. Most people have lived here for about 18 years before claiming benefits. Brits already have to take the "habitual residency test" if they have recently been out of the country. If your benefit qualification rules are no longer appropriate in a global economy, surely you change them.
I'm not against it. But whether it will actually affect anybody at all is pretty immaterial as to whether it would cause a fuss. It might not, but sometimes the public just reacts against perceived unfairness, whether or not it is in fact unfair or not.
Surely you can sell it on the basis that it won't actually affect any resident Brits, but will affect foreigners.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession.
so he'll abolish boom and bust ?
plus ca change
....
....
....
....
That's just nonsense. The restraint in public spending since 2010 has brought public expenditure much more in line with the tax base. The changes to public sector pensions will have a dramatic effect on the strain they will have on public finances going forward and the worst of the PFI schemes have been renegotiated or run down.
We are a long way from being out of the woods and we will be carrying roughly double the level of debt we had before but we are in a much better place.
Over 50% of Government spending of £742bn is on social protection and healthcare. Pensions make up the vast majority of the former and 80% of an individual's lifetime NHS spending is in the last 6 months of their life.
....
It will take the baby boomers dying off to have a sensible discussion about state provision for OAPs.
The Financial Times had an excellent graph showing the transfer of wealth from the young to the old that exactly follows the baby boomer generation
As I see it the spending in 2015-16 is 748bn. Of that 134bn is NHS and 108bn old age pensions. so £242bn out of £748bn. This is not 50%. Welfare is 111bn, of which 'social protection' is 59bn (most of that is via local government) The state pension is paid out of the contributions paid in, this is why the retirement age for women has risen and why all retirement ages are going up to 67 - and is to be linked to life expectancy after that. Previously this gave government s a nice little earner and was not a net cost to the state; that surplus is now declining. It is absurd to point out that most people got their NHS payments back only in later life. For it to be any different would imply we were all much more unhealthy and were attending hospital on a regular basis all through our lives. Most people are healthy and hope never want to visit a doctor or hospital.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
And years of falling real wages, stagnant productivity and with most new jobs going to low skilled economic migrants.
And where does this economic growth come from - take a look to see how the UK's budget and current account deficits compare to other European and G7 countries.
Zero CPI you mean - caused predominantly by the energy / commodity price falls, does Osborne deserve credit for that if you're so willing to absolve him from blame for other things.
We don't have zero house price inflations though do we but we do have falling home ownership rates with all the damage that does to economic and social mobility.
You see we can all bluster away, that's why I prefer facts. ONS data such as this:
The BoP deficit increased from £43bn in 2010 to £92bn in 2014.
The BoP isn't caused by the level of the government deficit but by the UK's continual living beyond its means - something no government is willing to discourage.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
You really don't like Osborne's predictions being measured against results do you.
Unfortunately for those of us in the real world we'll be paying extra taxes for the rest of our lives to pay back all Osborne's extra borrowing to buy votes.
For you residents of planet cheerleader let me tell you how Osborne has dealt with the real world:
Growth - fail Borrowing - fail Debt - fail Unemployment - initial failure followed by success Inflation - initial failure followed by success Rebalancing the economy - fail 'March of the Makers' - fail Trillion pound export target - fail Home ownership / house prices - fail
Richard, this is my final reply on this because this conversation is completely pointless.
We have had the fastest growth of any of the major countries in Europe despite starting in the worst position with the most combined public and private debt. We have cut our deficit to approximately 1/3 in terms of share of GDP, by half in actual numbers. We can still borrow at approximately zero so the markets are completely unconcerned about our debt. Our government does not make widgets. It should run its macro-economic policy in a way that encourages the makers of widgets to invest. We have 0.5% interest rates, capital is readily available again (partly because our banks have not been broken up), CT has been cut, our economy has been extremely stable. If people still do not have the confidence to invest that is a consequence of the real world, not a government failure. He has done more than any Chancellor in my lifetime to encourage exports and to bring new business to this country but his influence is inevitably at the margins. Do you think he should be building factories on behalf of the Treasury?
House building last year matched 2007. Still not good enough I grant you but once again the direction is right and he has again done what he can within the limits imposed on him by the appalling fiscal situation he inherited with a series of incentives.
Everything is a long way from perfect but your position is so extreme it really makes no sense at all.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
That's clearly the endgame. If you were an EU head of state, you might be asking why it is your problem that we the British have a welfare system that has practically zero contributory principle and acts like a magnet for unskilled workers, who you are glad to get rid of as it reduces your unemployment problems.
Irrespective of whether we are in the EU or not, getting benefits (of any kind) should require four years of National Insurance payments.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
You really don't like Osborne's predictions being measured against results do you.
Unfortunately for those of us in the real world we'll be paying extra taxes for the rest of our lives to pay back all Osborne's extra borrowing to buy votes.
For you residents of planet cheerleader let me tell you how Osborne has dealt with the real world:
Growth - fail Borrowing - fail Debt - fail Unemployment - initial failure followed by success Inflation - initial failure followed by success Rebalancing the economy - fail 'March of the Makers' - fail Trillion pound export target - fail Home ownership / house prices - fail
Richard, this is my final reply on this because this conversation is completely pointless.
We have had the fastest growth of any of the major countries in Europe despite starting in the worst position with the most combined public and private debt. We have cut our deficit to approximately 1/3 in terms of share of GDP, by half in actual numbers. We can still borrow at approximately zero so the markets are completely unconcerned about our debt. Our government does not make widgets. It should run its macro-economic policy in a way that encourages the makers of widgets to invest. We have 0.5% interest rates, capital is readily available again (partly because our banks have not been broken up), CT has been cut, our economy has been extremely stable. If people still do not have the confidence to invest that is a consequence of the real world, not a government failure. He has done more than any Chancellor in my lifetime to encourage exports and to bring new business to this country but his influence is inevitably at the margins. Do you think he should be building factories on behalf of the Treasury?
House building last year matched 2007. Still not good enough I grant you but once again the direction is right and he has again done what he can within the limits imposed on him by the appalling fiscal situation he inherited with a series of incentives.
Everything is a long way from perfect but your position is so extreme it really makes no sense at all.
I make widgets. There is bugger all this chancellor has done to encourage me to make more, I make them in spite of him,
Buy to let hammerings and stings on pension tax relief not hitting the 0.9% you mention but 80th to 99th percentile. Same people what got hit by rail track nationalisation and Brown's pension raids.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
The BoP isn't caused by the level of the government deficit but by the UK's continual living beyond its means - something no government is willing to discourage.
It's actually a bit more complicated than that: the flow of foreign money into the UK, in particular into property, tends to create a balance of payments issue. Money in equals money out. And money flowing into the UK property market will tend to flow out in terms of imports.
In the mid 2000s, the Spanish property bubble (and Germans and Brits buying second homes there) caused a similar balance of payments issue.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
because as Robert pointed out our recovery came from such a low point.
The LibDems must be getting seriously concerned that they're showing no improvement even with the Corbyistas running wild.
Boundary changes could be an extinction event for LibDem MPs.
The 9-4 Mr Meeks suggested on sub 8.5 seats at GE2020 might well be looking like a money purchase in a few years/
Trying to remember the effects of the proposed boundary changes of 2011 on LibDem seats:
Sheffield Hallam - chopped up, Clegg likely to stand down (which might help the LibDems) Leeds NW - chopped up Carshalton - chopped up Westmoreland - ??? Norfolk N - ??? Southport - ??? 4 way marginal perhaps Ceredigon - ??? 3 way marginal perhaps O&S - no change ? but MP has issues
How much chance of LibDem gains are there ?
Cambridge is probably the best, especially if Huppert stands again, maybe something in the Eastbourne / Lewes area ?
My friend - who is a member of the Labour Party in Cambridge - told me that if he'd realised it was going to be close, he's have voted for Huppert!
I would have thought the LibDems will hold Norfolk North, O&S (with a new candidate), Westmoreland, and Ceridgion.
The whole of South West London will be very interesting. Not least because there are basically four marginals there: Carshalton, Sutton & Cheam, Twickenham and Kingston. The way it is carved up could result in zero, one or two seats. Personally, I think that Cable knocked three to four points off the LibDem score in Twickenham, so any LD revival could help them there.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
But that's picking and choosing your dates. If we did since the beginning of 1999, then I'm fairly sure Spain would be ahead of Britain. If we did 2008, I'm sure Germany would be ahead of us. And if we did 2015, Spain would pip us again.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
But that's picking and choosing your dates. If we did since the beginning of 1999, then I'm fairly sure Spain would be ahead of Britain. If we did 2008, I'm sure Germany would be ahead of US. And if we did 2015, Spain would pip us again.
My date is chosen by when Osborne became Chancellor. On what basis is yours chosen?
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
because as Robert pointed out our recovery came from such a low point.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
because as Robert pointed out our recovery came from such a low point.
David Mellor yesterday "I feel like voting out simply because I am not going to be conned by that man,borrowing Chamberlain's overcoat, stumbling down the plane's steps waving a piece of paper signed by Juncker, claiming this is a triumph for Britain," Mellor fumed.
Chamberlain was misguided, at worst a dupe.
Cameron knows exactly what he is doing - more Quisling than Chamberlain
There is the thought that the 'peace in our time' negotiation gave the UK valuable extra months to start re-arming before the onset of the war.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
because as Robert pointed out our recovery came from such a low point.
No doubt that is Osborne's fault too??
No that was Browns.
Yes!! We have agreement at last. On that note I think I will go to bed.
We have gone from a peak of 10.2% of GDP to predicted 3.7% this year. Whether he is a billion or two out on the final figure won't change that.
In recent years the deficit has been falling at roughly 1% of GDP a year, roughly 18bn and it is projected to do that again in the next financial year.
All Osborne needs to do to sort the deficit is avoid a recession. Easier said than done of course, especially if international events swing against him, but he has a path planned out back to balance.
...
" A billion or two out on the final figure "
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Extra money in the economy due to QE has lead more people to buy chinese tat and this is the basis of our growth ?
If you know anything proper about QE then you should get the Nobel Prize for economics and go on a world lecture tour, because no one else does.
BTW if you don't want people to buy Chinese tat then just put interest rates up. Thats what real austerity would be like.
David Mellor yesterday "I feel like voting out simply because I am not going to be conned by that man,borrowing Chamberlain's overcoat, stumbling down the plane's steps waving a piece of paper signed by Juncker, claiming this is a triumph for Britain," Mellor fumed.
Chamberlain was misguided, at worst a dupe.
Cameron knows exactly what he is doing - more Quisling than Chamberlain
There is the thought that the 'peace in our time' negotiation gave the UK valuable extra months to start re-arming before the onset of the war.
There is also a thought that wheeling out pictures of Chamberlain is symptomatic of a lack of real argument.
The disaster the LibDems had in the seats they were defending in 2015 is well known but they also disintegrated in many traditional areas of strength which they had lost in 2010:
Extra money in the economy due to QE has lead more people to buy chinese tat and this is the basis of our growth ?
I know you're joking but I'm always amused by this argument, its as if people aren't aware that increased imports are actually a negative when it comes to measuring GDP growth. If there is growth it is despite Chinese tat not because of it.
This is interesting. It means IMHO that the sticking point is Cameron being allowed to trigger this temporary mild restriction on EU worker benefits emergency brake for four years immediately after the referendum.
That would create an argument for Remain, in order to allow it to be triggered.
"He also said the European Commission had tabled a text saying that the UK meets the criteria for triggering an emergency brake on the payment of in-work benefits to EU migrants, describing this development as a "significant breakthrough".
This means Mr Cameron could deliver on his commitment to restrict in-work benefits to migrants for four years, he added."
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
That's clearly the endgame. If you were an EU head of state, you might be asking why it is your problem that we the British have a welfare system that has practically zero contributory principle and acts like a magnet for unskilled workers, who you are glad to get rid of as it reduces your unemployment problems.
Irrespective of whether we are in the EU or not, getting benefits (of any kind) should require four years of National Insurance payments.
Fully agreed. I'm far more concerned with the natively born and bred population getting benefits without contributing than I am with migrants doing so; I have no doubt that the former is a much greater number of people.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
But that's picking and choosing your dates. If we did since the beginning of 1999, then I'm fairly sure Spain would be ahead of Britain. If we did 2008, I'm sure Germany would be ahead of us. And if we did 2015, Spain would pip us again.
The BoP isn't caused by the level of the government deficit but by the UK's continual living beyond its means - something no government is willing to discourage.
It's actually a bit more complicated than that: the flow of foreign money into the UK, in particular into property, tends to create a balance of payments issue. Money in equals money out. And money flowing into the UK property market will tend to flow out in terms of imports.
In the mid 2000s, the Spanish property bubble (and Germans and Brits buying second homes there) caused a similar balance of payments issue.
Or perhaps it might be expressed as the UK flogging off its assets (from Mayfair mansions to football clubs to overseas holdings to government bonds) to pay to live beyond its wealth creating capacity.
Now if we weren't attracting foreign money to buy UK assets wouldn't sterling fall in value until it reached a level where exports and imports of trade and tourism were in balance ?
I should also add, I think Michael Gove will time an announcement (coordinating with Cameron) that the UK Supreme Court will become the UK constitutional court in future, and the British Bill of Rights will effectively act as our constitution-lite.
So it will be written into statute that the UK constitutional court will take precedence over the ECtHR in future disputes where there is a clash.
Nothing to do with the renegotiation, but it will be useful mood music for Remain.
This Chancellor has slashed the Corporation Tax you'll pay on profits from selling widgets. Has that no effect on encouraging you to make more?
But I'm wondering what precisely you expect the Chancellor to realistically do given the position he started in?
You really havent a fking clue how manufacturing works have you ?
Right I'm off to bed.
I have a clue how corporation tax works. If you make a profit you pay tax, if you pay less tax that encourages investment to make more widgets to make more profit.
The Chancellor targeting those who make their income from house price inflation and supporting those who make their money from profits ultimately should redirect investment from bricks and mortar and towards profit making enterprises whether they be widget production or otherwise.
I should also add, I think Michael Gove will time an announcement (coordinating with Cameron) that the UK Supreme Court will become the UK constitutional court in future, and the British Bill of Rights will effectively act as our constitution-lite.
So it will be written into statute that the UK constitutional court will take precedence over the ECtHR in future disputes where there is a clash.
Nothing to do with the renegotiation, but it will be useful mood music for Remain.
And that is absolutely the right legal framework for our nation (or indeed any nation) - we need control over our own judicial system. Though we need to get rid of a generation of judges who seem to be driven by their own agendas rather than natural justice.
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
Ok. I give in. He's not omniscient or even psychic. Can we stop this nonsense now and focus on how he has dealt with the real world. Or has your visa expired?
Yes.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail The economy is unbalanced The BOP is appalling Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance We have had no serious tax reforms We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
And record employment. And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place. And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Everywhere has zero inflation because of the collapse in the oil price! And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
In the last year Robert but not since 2010.
But that's picking and choosing your dates. If we did since the beginning of 1999, then I'm fairly sure Spain would be ahead of Britain. If we did 2008, I'm sure Germany would be ahead of us. And if we did 2015, Spain would pip us again.
The BoP isn't caused by the level of the government deficit but by the UK's continual living beyond its means - something no government is willing to discourage.
It's actually a bit more complicated than that: the flow of foreign money into the UK, in particular into property, tends to create a balance of payments issue. Money in equals money out. And money flowing into the UK property market will tend to flow out in terms of imports.
In the mid 2000s, the Spanish property bubble (and Germans and Brits buying second homes there) caused a similar balance of payments issue.
Or perhaps it might be expressed as the UK flogging off its assets (from Mayfair mansions to football clubs to overseas holdings to government bonds) to pay to live beyond its wealth creating capacity.
Now if we weren't attracting foreign money to buy UK assets wouldn't sterling fall in value until it reached a level where exports and imports of trade and tourism were in balance ?
The balance of payments has many components and includes the income from overseas assets and, as an outgoing, the transfer of income abroad from assets here owned by foreigners. As we do well domestically and the rest of the world does less well then money perversely flows out. Its an indication of our economy doing relatively well.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Í don't see the problem. Just change the benefit rules so that you need 4 years residency to claim benefits, even if you are British
That's clearly the endgame. If you were an EU head of state, you might be asking why it is your problem that we the British have a welfare system that has practically zero contributory principle and acts like a magnet for unskilled workers, who you are glad to get rid of as it reduces your unemployment problems.
Irrespective of whether we are in the EU or not, getting benefits (of any kind) should require four years of National Insurance payments.
Fully agreed. I'm far more concerned with the natively born and bred population getting benefits without contributing than I am with migrants doing so; I have no doubt that the former is a much greater number of people.
I don't see why 18 year olds what come of age during a recession should be thrown on the streets.
Are really some people on PB speculating about which seats the LD will do OK in 2020?
At this point in time there is no point to speculate, people have not changed their voting preferences since the last election and I do not expect much change by 2020 baring an event. I'm expecting a LD recovery in about 40 years time, following past historical experience.
It's not possible while we are in the Council of Europe and thus the European Court of Human Rights either which predates the EU and isn't actually related whatsoever to the EU.
Nations that are in the Council of Europe: Turkey, Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Serbia etc
Nations that are not in the Council of Europe: United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc
Clearly our human rights will cease to exist overnight if we become more like Australians and Canadians and less like Russians!
On the subject of obscene footballers wages there is a story on the internet ( so beware) that Jordan Rhodes' transfer from Blackburn to Middlesbrough was stopped by Steve Gibson because Rhodes wanted a wage of £81,700 a week! And that is in the Championship.
Are really some people on PB speculating about which seats the LD will do OK in 2020?
At this point in time there is no point to speculate, people have not changed their voting preferences since the last election and I do not expect much change by 2020 baring an event. I'm expecting a LD recovery in about 40 years time, following past historical experience.
Speculating which 6 or 7 seats the libdems could win in 2020 is not the same as anticipating a recovery.
Comments
"But it is curious - actually, repulsive would be a better word - that those who claim to be concerned about sexual crimes against women are so sanguine about inviting into the country those from mysogynistic cultures and, as a result, with a propensity to commit such crimes (though that does not apply to all the individuals from those cultures, of course)."
And this was my interpretation. If my interpretation was wrong I apologize but I'm struggling to interpret it differently
"Her point (excluing flannel) was that people from mysogynist Muslim cultures have a propensity to commit violent crimes against women so for the authorities to allow them in is 'repulsive'. "
It tickles me how everyone puts their prejudice onto every event. Does anyone know anything about google, about its taxes, about any taxes? No they, we, you, me, know zilch. But dislike Osborne - ? Then whatever happens its wrong.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-by-hmrc-on-tax-evasion-and-the-hsbc-suisse-data-leak
Its laughable - the blind vindictive ignorance thats displayed by people venting their anti Osborne prejudices.
Never mind finding someone half decent to replace Corbyn, who is half decent to be an alternative to Osborne?
A concealed motor has been discovered during the examination of a bike used by a Belgian cyclist at the world cyclo-cross championships.. The bike was seized by cycling authorities after Femke Van den Driessche, 19, was forced to pull out of the women's under-23 race due to a mechanical problem.
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," International Cycling Union (UCI) president Brian Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly, there is no place to hide and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The UCI has scanned bikes at major competitions, including the Tour de France, in recent years amid rumours about cyclists using motors hidden in frames.
However, this is the first time such a device is believed to have been found.
http://news.sky.com/story/1633189/hidden-motor-found-in-cyclists-race-bike
The reason they were not wanted by Labour was - their race. This was because their racial group was assumed have social attitudes that were unacceptable. Assumed as a group....
Interesting, isn't it....
His clean-cut, wholesome image seems to be eating into Cruz's support with the evangelical Christians.
Bowls doesn't have enough money involved...
Cheap commodities are balanced against the Chinese slowdown - but I don't think anyone can forecast even the next twelve months.
George has certainly been lucky so far; I'm sure he's nothing like as arrogant as Brown was - for all our sakes I hope he continues to be lucky.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/snooker/10314420/Barry-Hearn-warns-snooker-cheats-you-will-be-caught-after-Stephen-Lee-is-found-guilty-of-match-fixing.html
At least one darts player has been banned for drugs - in this case marijuana
http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=58632
Bowls, maybe not but I'm sure there's a scandal out there somewhere.
@DavidJonesMP: Tusk says "no deal"; so #Brexit it is
Comically, the people on the ground (apparently they employ quite a few Zimbabweans to work in the visa offices etc) misunderstood and started applying the new rules to everyone - including blacks. That had to be fixed...
One of the rules that was used for this purpose was a declaration that serving in the British Army didn't mean you had any connection with Britain. Because this rule was promulgated world wide, this led to the comic incident where the Nepalese winner of a Victoria Cross was told that he had no connection with Britain.
Sanders & Bush?
What price Rubio?
This is Osborne's 2010 Budget speech:
" But as a result of the measures I will announce today, public sector net borrowing will be: £149 billion this year, falling to £116 billion next year, then £89 billion in 2012-13, and then £60 billion in 2013-14.
By 2014-15 borrowing reaches £37 billion, exactly half the amount forecast in the March Budget.
In 2015-16, borrowing falls further to £20 billion. "
Notice how the further you go into Osborne's borrowing predictions the more overborrowing occurs.
YouGov:
Con 39%
Lab 30%
UKIP 17%
LD 6%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2016
https://twitter.com/h8kes/status/693900733591207936
The Financial Times had an excellent graph showing the transfer of wealth from the young to the old that exactly follows the baby boomer generation
@David_Cameron word on the street is you fuck pigs mate
Boundary changes could be an extinction event for LibDem MPs.
Lots to think about there.
Our oligopoly banks are still to big to fail
The economy is unbalanced
The BOP is appalling
Our infrastructure is detrimental to our economic performance
We have had no serious tax reforms
We have an ingrained structural deficit
But on the plus side Google gave us some of their small change.
http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/ditch-the-structural-deficit why-osborne-has-struggled-to-hit-this-moving-target
For those who might be interested the IEA here also quote ''In 2010, Osborne laid out spending plans he forecast would reduce the overall ‘structural deficit’ to 0.8 per cent of GDP by 2014-15. ''
note the words 'structural deficit'.
Sheffield Hallam - chopped up, Clegg likely to stand down (which might help the LibDems)
Leeds NW - chopped up
Carshalton - chopped up
Westmoreland - ???
Norfolk N - ???
Southport - ??? 4 way marginal perhaps
Ceredigon - ??? 3 way marginal perhaps
O&S - no change ? but MP has issues
How much chance of LibDem gains are there ?
Cambridge is probably the best, especially if Huppert stands again, maybe something in the Eastbourne / Lewes area ?
http://www.lbc.co.uk/david-mellor-explains-why-he-would-consider-voting-to-leave-eu-124141
How is Twickenham affected by the proposed changes? That's another one with a small Con majority which could be overturned in the event of even a slight LD revival.
I should think O&S will get a different candidate than Carmichael - the only reason he probably stuck it out is they would definitely have lost it now. So it's a question of if the issues there hinder the next LD candidate or the place returns to type and sticks with the party they've stuck with in one form or another for 65 years.
And the fastest growth in Europe despite having the worst starting place.
And zero inflation.
Our BoP will improve as the deficit comes down. At the moment demand is being artificially increased to the tune of nearly £80bn in a year. It would be miraculous if that did not increase imports.
Unfortunately for those of us in the real world we'll be paying extra taxes for the rest of our lives to pay back all Osborne's extra borrowing to buy votes.
For you residents of planet cheerleader let me tell you how Osborne has dealt with the real world:
Growth - fail
Borrowing - fail
Debt - fail
Unemployment - initial failure followed by success
Inflation - initial failure followed by success
Rebalancing the economy - fail
'March of the Makers' - fail
Trillion pound export target - fail
Home ownership / house prices - fail
Chamberlain was misguided, at worst a dupe.
Cameron knows exactly what he is doing - more Quisling than Chamberlain
The "there's no alternative" line is peddled a lot Squeaky's fanboys.
It's nonsense of course, in the same complacent way that Osborne thinks he can do as he wishes, because no one sensible will dare vote for Labour or Corbyn. He comes a cropper should the lunatic be replaced by someone else, and let's face it any successor will look pretty good after what's been before them. And disaffected Tories can simply don't bother to vote at all.
Growth is all about picking the year,you appear to forget we have had the slowest recovery ever. Our current growth targets are all being shaved back and the bits of the economy we need to grow ( manufacturing and construction ) were both in recession last year. If he stopped borrowing there would be no "growth".
Inflation is low across the world due to falling oil and commodity prices, nothing to do with GO he's just sat in the chair when it happened.
And the reason the BOP is fked is because much of it is structural and he has done nothing to on shore the structural gaps, So no it won;t go down, it will just get bigger.
I would have thought the LibDems will hold Norfolk North, O&S (with a new candidate), Westmoreland, and Ceridgion.
The whole of South West London will be very interesting. Not least because there are basically four marginals there: Carshalton, Sutton & Cheam, Twickenham and Kingston. The way it is carved up could result in zero, one or two seats. Personally, I think that Cable knocked three to four points off the LibDem score in Twickenham, so any LD revival could help them there.
so £242bn out of £748bn. This is not 50%.
Welfare is 111bn, of which 'social protection' is 59bn (most of that is via local government)
The state pension is paid out of the contributions paid in, this is why the retirement age for women has risen and why all retirement ages are going up to 67 - and is to be linked to life expectancy after that. Previously this gave government s a nice little earner and was not a net cost to the state; that surplus is now declining.
It is absurd to point out that most people got their NHS payments back only in later life. For it to be any different would imply we were all much more unhealthy and were attending hospital on a regular basis all through our lives. Most people are healthy and hope never want to visit a doctor or hospital.
And where does this economic growth come from - take a look to see how the UK's budget and current account deficits compare to other European and G7 countries.
Zero CPI you mean - caused predominantly by the energy / commodity price falls, does Osborne deserve credit for that if you're so willing to absolve him from blame for other things.
We don't have zero house price inflations though do we but we do have falling home ownership rates with all the damage that does to economic and social mobility.
You see we can all bluster away, that's why I prefer facts. ONS data such as this:
The BoP deficit increased from £43bn in 2010 to £92bn in 2014.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-and-tables/data-selector.html?cdid=HBOG&dataset=pnbp&table-id=A
The BoP isn't caused by the level of the government deficit but by the UK's continual living beyond its means - something no government is willing to discourage.
We have had the fastest growth of any of the major countries in Europe despite starting in the worst position with the most combined public and private debt.
We have cut our deficit to approximately 1/3 in terms of share of GDP, by half in actual numbers.
We can still borrow at approximately zero so the markets are completely unconcerned about our debt.
Our government does not make widgets. It should run its macro-economic policy in a way that encourages the makers of widgets to invest. We have 0.5% interest rates, capital is readily available again (partly because our banks have not been broken up), CT has been cut, our economy has been extremely stable. If people still do not have the confidence to invest that is a consequence of the real world, not a government failure. He has done more than any Chancellor in my lifetime to encourage exports and to bring new business to this country but his influence is inevitably at the margins. Do you think he should be building factories on behalf of the Treasury?
House building last year matched 2007. Still not good enough I grant you but once again the direction is right and he has again done what he can within the limits imposed on him by the appalling fiscal situation he inherited with a series of incentives.
Everything is a long way from perfect but your position is so extreme it really makes no sense at all.
And we no longer have the fastest growth in Europe: we're now behind Ireland and Spain. (I might note that the worst starting place probably contributes to the period of above trend growth.)
Heres his message to the manufacturing sector
http://www.mas.businessgrowthservice.greatbusiness.gov.uk/
In the mid 2000s, the Spanish property bubble (and Germans and Brits buying second homes there) caused a similar balance of payments issue.
Twickenham - 12%
Kingston - 9%
Sutton - 6%
Carshalton - 5%
The next election will be very important for the LibDems in the areas they lost in 2015.
Failure to remain competitive and they could go the way they went in the likes of Cambridgeshire NE.
BTW if you don't want people to buy Chinese tat then just put interest rates up. Thats what real austerity would be like.
But I'm wondering what precisely you expect the Chancellor to realistically do given the position he started in?
For example Lib / LibDem vote in Hereford
1979 37%
1983 43%
1987 45%
1992 41%
1997 48%
2001 41%
2005 43%
2010 41%
2015 11% -30% and fourth place
(1) A June referendum is on
(2) It will force any Tories still on the fence pending "The Deal" to declare
Which could mean May comes out for Leave within the week.
Right I'm off to bed.
That would create an argument for Remain, in order to allow it to be triggered.
"He also said the European Commission had tabled a text saying that the UK meets the criteria for triggering an emergency brake on the payment of in-work benefits to EU migrants, describing this development as a "significant breakthrough".
This means Mr Cameron could deliver on his commitment to restrict in-work benefits to migrants for four years, he added."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35456633
Now if we weren't attracting foreign money to buy UK assets wouldn't sterling fall in value until it reached a level where exports and imports of trade and tourism were in balance ?
So it will be written into statute that the UK constitutional court will take precedence over the ECtHR in future disputes where there is a clash.
Nothing to do with the renegotiation, but it will be useful mood music for Remain.
The Chancellor targeting those who make their income from house price inflation and supporting those who make their money from profits ultimately should redirect investment from bricks and mortar and towards profit making enterprises whether they be widget production or otherwise.
http://twitter.com/CHSommers/status/693838358397763585/
That isn't possible while we remain in the EU
As we do well domestically and the rest of the world does less well then money perversely flows out. Its an indication of our economy doing relatively well.
At this point in time there is no point to speculate, people have not changed their voting preferences since the last election and I do not expect much change by 2020 baring an event.
I'm expecting a LD recovery in about 40 years time, following past historical experience.
Nations that are in the Council of Europe: Turkey, Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Serbia etc
Nations that are not in the Council of Europe: United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc
Clearly our human rights will cease to exist overnight if we become more like Australians and Canadians and less like Russians!
N.H. , Boston Herald
Trump 38 +5
Cruz 13 -1
Bush 10 +1
Rubio 10 +2
Kasich 8 -4
Christie 5 -2
Fiorina 5 0
Paul 5 +2
Carson 3 -1
Huckabee 1 0
Kasich losing votes to Trump, so much for the establishment coalescing behind an anti-Trump candidate.