Basically, there’s nothing new or noteworthy in the Tory manifesto and we’ll have forgotten about it in 24 hours. It just reinforces the lines to date. That’s mission accomplished isn’t it?
Arguably does give Labour some room to push their policies though. I note the nurses pledge has already been debunked.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
The Tories backed Labour's spending plans. Are you really going to sit here and tell me we'd have had no recession or deficit with them in power? Come on.
Labour backed the Tories’ policies over the ERM. Indeed, Brown was angry that we withdrew from it! Does that give the Tories a free pass for Black Wednesday? Absolutely not.
When a party is in government and epically screws up, it does not matter what the opposition would or would not have done.
I'm just saying the idea that there would have been no recession or deficit under the Tories is literally ridiculous.
Gordon Brown thought he’d abolished boom and bust! And he kept spending accordingly.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
The Tories weren't in government, Labour were. Labour overspent as they always do. Problem with Labour is they always run out of other people's money.
And you’re going to run out of other people’s money paying for Brexit.
Evidence please
Evidence of what? We are still running a deficit and Brexit is going to result in less tax money and less growth. Simple. Other people’s money.
So, if your concerned about a deficit you clearly will reject Labour?
Still waiting for evidence
You’re more than happy to swallow the horse manure that comes out of Boris and friends’s mouths without any evidence. What’s different?
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
I think Labour would be less damaged by the GFC if somebody had resigned over it promptly and honourably. If they had said, ‘Whoop, guys, I got this wrong and as a result I am going to quit,’ I think enough people wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt to save their political bacon.
But the two who were responsible were Brown, who ran the huge deficits, and Darling, who devised the disastrous tripartite system. Brown was apparently very contrite in private, but his truly laughable claim in public that he had never said ‘no more boom and bust’ coupled with his refusal to resign shredded his reputation. Darling, meanwhile, saved his personal reputation at the cost of prolonging the agony for his government by not going even when Brown tried to sack him.
Labour will appreciate this analysis. They love the IFS now!
Depends whether it gets any traction: the three areas of public spending that most people care about are the NHS, pensions and schools (in that order.)
Pensioners have been shielded from austerity all along by the triple lock, so if schools and hospitals are getting a boost then that's all the key bases covered. Extra police officers, the social care sticking plaster and some money for road repairs are the cherry on top.
So, the Tories can point at the extra money being spent, claim that they're not splurging cash on everything because they're being responsible (and, relative to Labour, they're being positively Osbornian in their frugality,) and the numbers of voters who are offended by the areas that have missed out will be relatively limited. Moreover, the main group amongst them - people of working age who are largely or wholly dependent on social security - would all have been voting for Labour whatever the Tories said, in the hope of a hefty slab of redistribution.
If you're comparing two retail offers, one of which may be likened to a packet of cheap biscuits (Con) and the other to a seven-course banquet at the Ritz (Lab,) then of course people are going to want the banquet - provided that they think that they won't also be paying the bill for it. If offered the banquet followed by having their bank accounts emptied, or a free box of custard creams, they'll take the custard creams.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
I thought you guys were in favour of minimal to no regulation?
Well, first i'm not in any party.
Secondly - of course we need regulation - but regulation that actually, you know does the job.
Lots of box ticking is not effective regulation - as we know not just from the banks but child safety.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
I thought you guys were in favour of minimal to no regulation?
Well, first i'm not in any party.
Secondly - of course we need regulation - but regulation that actually, you know does the job.
Lots of box ticking is not effective regulation - as we know not just from the banks but child safety.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
YEp - Labour always does
So do you support more regulation or not? You're all over the shop.
The original point was that it's literally insane to suggest that if the Tories had been in charge, this story would have been any different. The right were in charge in the USA, how did they handle it? Terribly.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
And they'd be right. She's the candidate I feel most sorry for, since she deserves to win as a standing rebuke to Labour's antisemitism, but every single Tory MP counts in this election.
I suspect a local LD/Lab deal in play - not a single Lab leaflet or sign of any campaign at all.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
According to what you have said on here about your age, you would have been in your early teens at the time of the GFC.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
That Scottish poll comes back to an issue I've alluded to before, where I have no local knowledge: to what extent are the SCons going to hoover up that intersect of those for Unionism and those for Leave? I would imagine the great bulk of their vote is those who are for both. To what extent do they also appeal to Unionist Remainers and (less likely I guess) pro-independence Brexiteers?
The great hope of Remainers was the Tories getting a thrashing in Scotland. But the SCons seats overlapped with the most pro-leave parts of Scotland. They might benefit from their vote concentrating exactly where they need it and thereby keeping losses to a minimum. Incredibly good new for Boris if so - not only for a majority, but also for saying that his majority has has some (although a lessened) legitimacy in Scotland to proceed with Brexit.
Well, isn't the split:
Unionist + Leave = Con Unionist + Remain = LD Seperatist + [] = SNP Unionist + ? = Labour
The interesting thing about Scotland in 2019 is changing tactical vote assumptions.
Almost.
Unionist + Leave = Con Unionist + Remain = LD Being a normal European country = SNP Meh + Meh = Labour
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Is she the one from Liverpool that Tim formerly of this parish got on well with?
God only knows what he makes of Labour now
Yep the one elected on a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result in Liverpool and has run off to London rather than explain to her constituents why she lied to them in 2017.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
The Tories weren't in government, Labour were. Labour overspent as they always do. Problem with Labour is they always run out of other people's money.
And you’re going to run out of other people’s money paying for Brexit.
Evidence please
Evidence of what? We are still running a deficit and Brexit is going to result in less tax money and less growth. Simple. Other people’s money.
So, if your concerned about a deficit you clearly will reject Labour?
Still waiting for evidence
You’re more than happy to swallow the horse manure that comes out of Boris and friends’s mouths without any evidence. What’s different?
Nope - I don't like any party particularly.
I like my local Lib Dem candidate as he strikes me as a true public servant and I have said so repeatedly.
But the bottom line is the sewer dwelling marxists have to be kept out of power - literally everything else is secondary.
Shame TSE spinning for the separatists now - this poll puts them on the same poll number they ve been getting for a decade - hardly great news for a party that needs 50pc+1
You did see that Yes was on 49% in the same poll?
Who cares - Boris says no inyref2 for you - try not to cry
But you were just saying the SNP were 'on the same poll number they ve been getting for a decade' as if it was of import. Make yer mind up.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
According to what you have said on here about your age, you would have been in your early teens at the time of the GFC.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I was going to make a similar comment but I thought - what's the point he is a mindless Labour drone.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Is she the one from Liverpool that Tim formerly of this parish got on well with?
God only knows what he makes of Labour now
Yep the one elected on a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result in Liverpool and has run off to London rather than explain to her constituents why she lied to them in 2017.
There were other factors. And chicken running may not be dignified, but having changed parties there's no reason someone should be forced to stand in a seat they have no hope in.
Been out all day. Did the Tories manifest land well today? No feel for it at all.
No criticism of it on BBC radio news. Political balance between the parties was achieved by quoting the Lib Dems attacking Labour's WASPI policy and Labour defending it.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
YEp - Labour always does
So do you support more regulation or not? You're all over the shop.
The original point was that it's literally insane to suggest that if the Tories had been in charge, this story would have been any different. The right were in charge in the USA, how did they handle it? Terribly.
The tories weren't in power, those parties that were in power have to take the blame
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
The Tories weren't in government, Labour were. Labour overspent as they always do. Problem with Labour is they always run out of other people's money.
And you’re going to run out of other people’s money paying for Brexit.
Evidence please
Evidence of what? We are still running a deficit and Brexit is going to result in less tax money and less growth. Simple. Other people’s money.
So, if your concerned about a deficit you clearly will reject Labour?
Still waiting for evidence
You’re more than happy to swallow the horse manure that comes out of Boris and friends’s mouths without any evidence. What’s different?
Nope - I don't like any party particularly.
I like my local Lib Dem candidate as he strikes me as a true public servant and I have said so repeatedly.
But the bottom line is the sewer dwelling marxists have to be kept out of power - literally everything else is secondary.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
The Tories wanted less regulation.
It's honestly like you live on another planet
LOL - right back at you
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
I supported more regulation, New Labour did a piss poor job.
YEp - Labour always does
So do you support more regulation or not? You're all over the shop.
The original point was that it's literally insane to suggest that if the Tories had been in charge, this story would have been any different. The right were in charge in the USA, how did they handle it? Terribly.
The tories weren't in power, those parties that were in power have to take the blame
That includes Labour
I am saying Labour is to blame. I literally said that above. Have it again: they were to blame.
I'm simply saying the Tories wouldn't have managed it any better, that is all.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
Let me ask you something. Are you wrong about anything, ever?
And actually you previously said you are a “young” person. Being generous and guessing you are 26 - GFC started in 2007 so by any stretch of maths you would have been at school.
There is nothing "progressive" about helping Jeremy Corbyn win. Huge swathes of the British Left have sold their souls.
I will never ever vote for a Tory Party let by Boris Johnson. If they get a new leader more like Cameron or Clegg I would consider it. Of course I'd look at the policies first.
What is the meaning of his 'Phil Jones' to whom you refer?
Edited extra bit: *this, even.
He plays for Manchester United, he's the Luca Badoer of defenders.
Badoer has been unfairly maligned, he would have scored points under the current system.
Badoer holds the record for the most Grand Prix starts (50) and the most race laps completed (2364) without scoring a point,[1] although all of his races before his 2009 comeback came during a period when only the top six finishers scored points. Under the 2010 scoring system, he would have scored 26 points over his career.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
Let me ask you something. Are you wrong about anything, ever?
And actually you previously said you are a “young” person. Being generous and guessing you are 26 - GFC started in 2007 so by any stretch of maths you would have been at school.
I'm not revealing my age, let's drop that.
I am often wrong, I think we're very likely to see a Tory majority - and I predicted that wouldn't ever happen. So I got that wrong for sure.
Basically, there’s nothing new or noteworthy in the Tory manifesto and we’ll have forgotten about it in 24 hours. It just reinforces the lines to date. That’s mission accomplished isn’t it?
Arguably does give Labour some room to push their policies though. I note the nurses pledge has already been debunked.
Has it? All I saw was some idiot finding out that increasing numbers often means a combination of recruitment and retention. Honest this modem need for a “gotcha” moment is depressing.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
There is nothing "progressive" about helping Jeremy Corbyn win. Huge swathes of the British Left have sold their souls.
I will never ever vote for a Tory Party let by Boris Johnson. If they get a new leader more like Cameron or Clegg I would consider it. Of course I'd look at the policies first.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
There is nothing "progressive" about helping Jeremy Corbyn win. Huge swathes of the British Left have sold their souls.
I will never ever vote for a Tory Party let by Boris Johnson. If they get a new leader more like Cameron or Clegg I would consider it. Of course I'd look at the policies first.
Well., I will never ever vote for a Labour Party led by Corbyn or his ilk. I really was going to vote LD this time (I did in the Euro's) but the imperative is to stop Corbyn, ergo Boris gets my vote even though its a tory seat.
There is nothing "progressive" about helping Jeremy Corbyn win. Huge swathes of the British Left have sold their souls.
I will never ever vote for a Tory Party let by Boris Johnson. If they get a new leader more like Cameron or Clegg I would consider it. Of course I'd look at the policies first.
Well., I will never ever vote for a Labour Party led by Corbyn or his ilk. I really was going to vote LD this time (I did in the Euro's) but the imperative is to stop Corbyn, ergo Boris gets my vote even though its a tory seat.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
No I didn't predict the financial crash and no I didn't think at the time it was going to happen. In hindsight that was obviously wrong. It's unfortunate that Vince Cable wasn't listened to and I wish I had.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
That’s fine. Don’t try and pretend again that you understood it at the time.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
It's interesting that the Tories have a few bn unaccounted for in their infrastructure budget. Hopefully it's for something exciting. I'll be honest, I'm pretty underwhelmed. I think by fearing they'll make 'the same mistake' (unpopular policy announcement) again, they've actually made the real same mistake - thinking that just not being Labour is enough. It is not enough, you have to speak to people's ambitions and aspirations. However, they have time and opportunity to do better.
I am saying Labour is to blame. I literally said that above. Have it again: they were to blame.
I'm simply saying the Tories wouldn't have managed it any better, that is all.
Actually we wouldn't have, Peter Lilley made a very prescient criticism of the regulatory system Brown brought in which literally predicted the exact problems that the banking crisis exposed in the regulatory system.
More regulations are useless if they are just an exercise in box ticking.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Is she the one from Liverpool that Tim formerly of this parish got on well with?
God only knows what he makes of Labour now
Yep the one elected on a manifesto commitment to respect the referendum result in Liverpool and has run off to London rather than explain to her constituents why she lied to them in 2017.
There were other factors. And chicken running may not be dignified, but having changed parties there's no reason someone should be forced to stand in a seat they have no hope in.
But like every other Labour MP she lied to get elected in 2017, has not apologised for doing so and cannot be trusted now for that very reason
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
That’s fine. Don’t try and pretend again that you understood it at the time.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
That’s fine. Don’t try and pretend again that you understood it at the time.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
That’s fine. Don’t try and pretend again that you understood it at the time.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
It was a stupid thing to say.
Well, in fairness, we’ve all done that as well...
Yes but it is worth acknowledging it and I will hold my hands up for that.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a blessed relief that I do not have to vote for either. If I did have to choose just between the two, honesty would be only one of many criteria I would apply. Were I to decide however on just that one factor, Corbyn would have to win, by some distance.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
Yeah either this hack has no understanding of how MRP works or the No 10 spad doesn't. Either way, sad how many people in our public life are so thick.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
Including pointing out how shit the regulation was?
Labour fecked up royally
Let alone that no more boom and bust crap - so lets spend, spend spend
I think Labour would be less damaged by the GFC if somebody had resigned over it promptly and honourably. If they had said, ‘Whoop, guys, I got this wrong and as a result I am going to quit,’ I think enough people wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt to save their political bacon.
But the two who were responsible were Brown, who ran the huge deficits, and Darling, who devised the disastrous tripartite system. Brown was apparently very contrite in private, but his truly laughable claim in public that he had never said ‘no more boom and bust’ coupled with his refusal to resign shredded his reputation. Darling, meanwhile, saved his personal reputation at the cost of prolonging the agony for his government by not going even when Brown tried to sack him.
Javid and Johnson today trumpeted the fiscal prudence of the Tories. How therefore do they explain how our national debt has now risen to £2.27 trillion and will continue to rise with a hard Brexit and a lack of new tax raising measures.
If the Tories win this election it could be the last one they will win.
Easy, Labour left them with an eye-watering deficit in 2010
No, the GFC left us with a massive defecit. Or do you think it was Labour's fault?
Yes.
It is Labour's fault it was overspending before the recession hit. Recessions happen - there was no reason to be running a major deficit after nearly two decades of uninterrupted growth. A recession was long overdue, under Keynesian economics which Labour was supposed to understand they should have been running a budget surplus but instead they were running a maxed out deficit.
Had the country had a small surplus going into the GFC then we could have absorbed the shock. We didn't.
Old argument. Nothing the Tories were advocating at the time would have made things any better.
The Tories weren't in government, Labour were. Labour overspent as they always do. Problem with Labour is they always run out of other people's money.
It's a warning for any party who think their best laid plans wont be thrown of course by events. Guarantees to not increase income tax or vat can really bit if we hit a recession and the budget goes into freefall. Not if, but when...
If a recession hits then we will need countercyclical spending. That is the time to expand into a deficit, not before a recession.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
I do not disagree with his assessment of Corbyn, but does he realise Boris is leading the Conservatives? The man for whom the test of whether he is lying is whether his mouth is open.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a blessed relief that I do not have to vote for either. If I did have to choose just between the two, honesty would be only one of many criteria I would apply. Were I to decide however on just that one factor, Corbyn would have to win, by some distance.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
Corbyn would not win on honesty. Even though he’s up against Johnson. That’s a damning comment but it’s also true.
I am in the highly unfortunate position where I do effectively have to choose between them. For the first time in 18 years of voting in every election including parish council by-elections and the referendum for Ceredigion to have an elected mayor I am very seriously considering spoiling my ballot paper.
Averaging the mid GE seat markets of the two spread-betting firms, the Tories are +4.5 today at a campaign high of 346.5 seats, Labour are -2 at 206.5 seats and the LibUndems are down -2.5 at a new campaign low 26 seats. On the basis of these numbers the Tories are set for a majority of 43 seats, which corresponds closely with a number of other recent forecasts.
Should not be an 'ouch' to true conservatives - limiting change (conserving what is) is what conservatism is.
Brexit is by far the most radical and revolutionary policy of my lifetime. There is nothing conservative about this Conservative Party.
Good. Though it sounds like you're being critical, that is good news. Since when has the Conservative Party been petrified of making some radical policies where necessary? Every good Tory PM of my lifetime has been radical and revolutionary when necessary.
Thatcher - Do I need to expand on this? Her name is synonymous with radical and revolutionary. Cameron - Equal marriage, bringing the country back from the brink of bankruptcy after Brown, holding the referendum in the first place.
Major was OK but not great, he was weak and pretty useless post Black Wednesday and led to the worst election drubbing ever. May was neither radical nor revolutionary and she was a pathetic, dismal failure.
If Boris is going to be like Cameron/Thatcher in being confident to take the country forward rather than follow the path of worst PM ever Theresa May then that is good news is it not?
I'm not old enough to have been alive under any other Tory PMs but being radical and revolutionary at the right times has been a strength not a weakness for many.
Regarding conservatism, neither critical nor approving, Philip - just factual.
I go back to Atlee, who was pretty radical, so yes, I agree, radicalism can be positive or negative. Depends on the policy, the circumstances, and the options.
Brexit is radical alright, and the stupidest policy any government has tried to implement in my lifetime, but if you haven't worked that out yet, can't help you.
We'll see before long, should be under 10 weeks until we Brexit now. Your relentless pessimism hopefully won't survive the reality of Brexit being fine.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
I do not disagree with his assessment of Corbyn, but does he realise Boris is leading the Conservatives? The man for whom the test of whether he is lying is whether his mouth is open.
I disagree.
He’s a journalist. He lies with his mouth closed too.
Should not be an 'ouch' to true conservatives - limiting change (conserving what is) is what conservatism is.
Brexit is by far the most radical and revolutionary policy of my lifetime. There is nothing conservative about this Conservative Party.
Good. Though it sounds like you're being critical, that is good news. Since when has the Conservative Party been petrified of making some radical policies where necessary? Every good Tory PM of my lifetime has been radical and revolutionary when necessary.
Thatcher - Do I need to expand on this? Her name is synonymous with radical and revolutionary. Cameron - Equal marriage, bringing the country back from the brink of bankruptcy after Brown, holding the referendum in the first place.
Major was OK but not great, he was weak and pretty useless post Black Wednesday and led to the worst election drubbing ever. May was neither radical nor revolutionary and she was a pathetic, dismal failure.
If Boris is going to be like Cameron/Thatcher in being confident to take the country forward rather than follow the path of worst PM ever Theresa May then that is good news is it not?
I'm not old enough to have been alive under any other Tory PMs but being radical and revolutionary at the right times has been a strength not a weakness for many.
Regarding conservatism, neither critical nor approving, Philip - just factual.
I go back to Atlee, who was pretty radical, so yes, I agree, radicalism can be positive or negative. Depends on the policy, the circumstances, and the options.
Brexit is radical alright, and the stupidest policy any government has tried to implement in my lifetime, but if you haven't worked that out yet, can't help you.
We'll see before long, should be under 10 weeks until we Brexit now. Your relentless pessimism hopefully won't survive the reality of Brexit being fine.
You cannot imagine how much I hope you are right and I am wrong.
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
I don't believe I told you what my age was. I said I was relatively young but I don't reveal personal details on the Internet, so let's have no more discussion about that thank you.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
You said you were a university student in 2017. I am assuming that was undergraduate but let’s assume you did postgrad work (as several posters here have). You might therefore have been 25 in June 2017. That would put your DOB sometime in the early 1990s - around 1992 at the earliest. So you would have been at best 15 when the crisis hit.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I support greater regulation and in hindsight New Labour were absolutely wrong.
That’s fine. Don’t try and pretend again that you understood it at the time.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
It was a stupid thing to say.
The test is not whether one has ever said anything stupid - excluding the mute, the category of those who have not is very small indeed - but rather whether one has ever said anything intelligent...
There is nothing "progressive" about helping Jeremy Corbyn win. Huge swathes of the British Left have sold their souls.
I will never ever vote for a Tory Party let by Boris Johnson. If they get a new leader more like Cameron or Clegg I would consider it. Of course I'd look at the policies first.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a blessed relief that I do not have to vote for either. If I did have to choose just between the two, honesty would be only one of many criteria I would apply. Were I to decide however on just that one factor, Corbyn would have to win, by some distance.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
Corbyn would not win on honesty. Even though he’s up against Johnson. That’s a damning comment but it’s also true.
I am in the highly unfortunate position where I do effectively have to choose between them. For the first time in 18 years of voting in every election including parish council by-elections and the referendum for Ceredigion to have an elected mayor I am very seriously considering spoiling my ballot paper.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a blessed relief that I do not have to vote for either. If I did have to choose just between the two, honesty would be only one of many criteria I would apply. Were I to decide however on just that one factor, Corbyn would have to win, by some distance.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
I find this narrative about the PM being a liar fascinating, precisely because It shows how we each live in our own realities.
As far as you are concerned he has deliberately mislead people in a systematic way, and this marks him out as uniquely dishonest. I see him as, at worst, like any other politician and, at best, more likely to say what he thinks.
I can’t recall a political character that led to two such different, honestly held, views of them.
I have followed the comments about city regulation with some interest, having had to deal with the FSA (predecessor of the FCA during the Blair/Brown years). It was a standing joke that the staff at the FSA were those who could not get a job at one of the companies, or were so incompetent that they had been sacked by a company. The director responsible for our oversight was from a mortgage background and had so little knowledge of retail insurance that I had to explain the absolute basics of how business was transacted between broker and insurer.
I am saying Labour is to blame. I literally said that above. Have it again: they were to blame.
I'm simply saying the Tories wouldn't have managed it any better, that is all.
Actually we wouldn't have, Peter Lilley made a very prescient criticism of the regulatory system Brown brought in which literally predicted the exact problems that the banking crisis exposed in the regulatory system.
More regulations are useless if they are just an exercise in box ticking.
There were nearly 4,000 people working at the FSA, and no shortage of regulation, but in the end it was completely bloody useless.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth of this tale or your friend's integrity, but is he unaware that Johnson was sacked twice from senior post for lying, masqueraded as a pro-business pro-Europe candidate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a blessed relief that I do not have to vote for either. If I did have to choose just between the two, honesty would be only one of many criteria I would apply. Were I to decide however on just that one factor, Corbyn would have to win, by some distance.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
Corbyn would not win on honesty. Even though he’s up against Johnson. That’s a damning comment but it’s also true.
I am in the highly unfortunate position where I do effectively have to choose between them. For the first time in 18 years of voting in every election including parish council by-elections and the referendum for Ceredigion to have an elected mayor I am very seriously considering spoiling my ballot paper.
No I didn't predict the financial crash and no I didn't think at the time it was going to happen. In hindsight that was obviously wrong. It's unfortunate that Vince Cable wasn't listened to and I wish I had.
Oh please, that old sage Vince had predicted six of the last two recessions.
No I didn't predict the financial crash and no I didn't think at the time it was going to happen. In hindsight that was obviously wrong. It's unfortunate that Vince Cable wasn't listened to and I wish I had.
Oh please, that old sage Vince had predicted six of the last two recessions.
I'm not a great Vince fan, but this is a classic example of the problems of economic forecasting. So, I can tell you that Germany has a demographics problem as serious as Japan's or Italy's. That means that at some point economic growth will crunch to a halt as an ever greater share of economic output of the young is spent on looking after the old. But I can't tell you when it will happen, as there are a bunch of other factors, such as the direction of the German household savings rate, that will have a lot of near term output.
A good economist can tell you where you will see problems, but very few can tell you when.
It might be wishful thinking, but I like to think there’s a whiff of fear in how China is handling the protests. Were they to become visible nationwide, and that sort of voice gain a platform? Who knows. I suppose the platform is the tricky bit.
Apparently Luciana Berger goes down quite well with the electorate in Finchley and Golders Green, but she's not thought likely to win. Too many voters adopt the attitude that one less Tory MP equals a slightly increased chance of a Corbyn-led Government.
Exactly why I've moved from spoilt ballot to Con despite the fact that Mike Freer is a people's vote remainer tory.
Anecdotally, a very left wing friend of mine stunned me today by telling me he was voting Tory.
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Ydoeuthr, I do not question the truth oate for Mayor of London, opposed Theresa May's Brexit Deal twice and swore that he would not support a border in the Irish Sea. This is before we get into his colorful personal life.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
Yes.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
It is a ble
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
I find this narrative about the PM being a liar fascinating, precisely because It shows how we each live in our own realities.
As far as you are concerned he has deliberately mislead people in a systematic way, and this marks him out as uniquely dishonest. I see him as, at worst, like any other politician and, at best, more likely to say what he thinks.
I can’t recall a political character that led to two such different, honestly held, views of them.
It is actually worse than that, TtL. He combines extreme amorality with a self-centred conceit that singles him out as an extraordinarily dangerous and unprincipled individual of a tye that one would be unlikely to encounter in any walk of life.
I claim to be in something of an advantage over most people in making this assessment. A close relative was at Balliol with him. He wrote a perceptive and informaative article about Johnson several years ago. It remains one of the best pieces on the man I have ever read.
No I didn't predict the financial crash and no I didn't think at the time it was going to happen. In hindsight that was obviously wrong. It's unfortunate that Vince Cable wasn't listened to and I wish I had.
Oh please, that old sage Vince had predicted six of the last two recessions.
I'm not a great Vince fan, but this is a classic example of the problems of economic forecasting. So, I can tell you that Germany has a demographics problem as serious as Japan's or Italy's. That means that at some point economic growth will crunch to a halt as an ever greater share of economic output of the young is spent on looking after the old. But I can't tell you when it will happen, as there are a bunch of other factors, such as the direction of the German household savings rate, that will have a lot of near term output.
A good economist can tell you where you will see problems, but very few can tell you when.
There was that movement house price crash or something, who predicted a huge house price crash and advocated selling their properties and renting in 2003/4 when average house prices where about £100,000. Yes, they were accurate that a crash was coming, but that crash was at a peak average of £190,000, and even at the bottom of the crash prices dropped to £150,000 and is now well over £220,000.
I am saying Labour is to blame. I literally said that above. Have it again: they were to blame.
I'm simply saying the Tories wouldn't have managed it any better, that is all.
Actually we wouldn't have, Peter Lilley made a very prescient criticism of the regulatory system Brown brought in which literally predicted the exact problems that the banking crisis exposed in the regulatory system.
More regulations are useless if they are just an exercise in box ticking.
There were nearly 4,000 people working at the FSA, and no shortage of regulation, but in the end it was completely bloody useless.
If all that they did was useless, I would not mind, 4,000 civil servants pay packets is expensive, but manageable.
Sadly they IMO termed a normal small oscillation in the business cycle in to a very significant economic downturn that we are still living with.
It might be wishful thinking, but I like to think there’s a whiff of fear in how China is handling the protests. Were they to become visible nationwide, and that sort of voice gain a platform? Who knows. I suppose the platform is the tricky bit.
I think Carrie Lam is finished. I know these votes have almost no influence on electing the Chief Exec but Beijing will be going up the wall right now. Her job is to manage integration without anyone noticing and she’s failed spectacularly.
What Xi does next is the main, and rather more alarming, question.
Comments
I remember clearly what happened and the part your piss poor regulation played in it.
---- Just curious, seems like IDS is the most vulnerable-- Even the bookies have written Goldsmith off...
But the two who were responsible were Brown, who ran the huge deficits, and Darling, who devised the disastrous tripartite system. Brown was apparently very contrite in private, but his truly laughable claim in public that he had never said ‘no more boom and bust’ coupled with his refusal to resign shredded his reputation. Darling, meanwhile, saved his personal reputation at the cost of prolonging the agony for his government by not going even when Brown tried to sack him.
Major and Lamont redux, in a way.
Pensioners have been shielded from austerity all along by the triple lock, so if schools and hospitals are getting a boost then that's all the key bases covered. Extra police officers, the social care sticking plaster and some money for road repairs are the cherry on top.
So, the Tories can point at the extra money being spent, claim that they're not splurging cash on everything because they're being responsible (and, relative to Labour, they're being positively Osbornian in their frugality,) and the numbers of voters who are offended by the areas that have missed out will be relatively limited. Moreover, the main group amongst them - people of working age who are largely or wholly dependent on social security - would all have been voting for Labour whatever the Tories said, in the hope of a hefty slab of redistribution.
If you're comparing two retail offers, one of which may be likened to a packet of cheap biscuits (Con) and the other to a seven-course banquet at the Ritz (Lab,) then of course people are going to want the banquet - provided that they think that they won't also be paying the bill for it. If offered the banquet followed by having their bank accounts emptied, or a free box of custard creams, they'll take the custard creams.
Secondly - of course we need regulation - but regulation that actually, you know does the job.
Lots of box ticking is not effective regulation - as we know not just from the banks but child safety.
Another broken promise
I'm beginning to think my total lack of knowledge about football might be negatively affecting my bets.
The original point was that it's literally insane to suggest that if the Tories had been in charge, this story would have been any different. The right were in charge in the USA, how did they handle it? Terribly.
🤣😂🤣😂
Are you saying that at that time you had a detailed understanding of tripartite regulation, the inter-bank lending system, the mortgage market and the credit default swap issue, and realised it was all going wrong and needed more regulation?
Because if so, I am afraid I don’t believe you. Even most experienced bankers didn’t get these things (therein lay much of the problem).
Unionist + Leave = Con
Unionist + Remain = LD
Being a normal European country = SNP
Meh + Meh = Labour
I like my local Lib Dem candidate as he strikes me as a true public servant and I have said so repeatedly.
But the bottom line is the sewer dwelling marxists have to be kept out of power - literally everything else is secondary.
The tories are therefore the least worse choice
His reasoning was basically ‘Corbyn is a lying scumbag and anything is better than him.’
Plus you put it so much better.
I supported more regulation which people like Vince Cable - to his credit - supported and warned of the crash before it happened. I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of regulation, just that in my short experience unfettered capitalism always leads to disaster.
That includes Labour
and least worst?
I'm simply saying the Tories wouldn't have managed it any better, that is all.
And actually you previously said you are a “young” person. Being generous and guessing you are 26 - GFC started in 2007 so by any stretch of maths you would have been at school.
Badoer holds the record for the most Grand Prix starts (50) and the most race laps completed (2364) without scoring a point,[1] although all of his races before his 2009 comeback came during a period when only the top six finishers scored points. Under the 2010 scoring system, he would have scored 26 points over his career.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luca_Badoer
I am often wrong, I think we're very likely to see a Tory majority - and I predicted that wouldn't ever happen. So I got that wrong for sure.
Of course, you might be a mature student. But you have also repeatedly said you are a ‘young’ person in your mid-twenties.
You can’t have it both ways. You cannot say you are young and can speak for your demographic, and then that you were wise to highly complex economic events when you would have barely left primary school. That merely makes you look silly.
You can say you now support greater regulation and with hindsight NewLabour were wrong. That’s no problem. After all, those of us around at the time mostly missed the key weaknesses as well so we can hardly criticise you for using hindsight. I was doing a Masters in politics and economics and I missed most of the warning signs (my very confident prediction was of a London house price crash, which shows what I knew). But don’t try To have it both ways.
I burn no flames for Corbyn but he bears no comparison in the Lying Scumbag department.
That’s why I was stunned.
Admittedly, most of your criticisms could actually be aimed at Corbyn as well. They are very similar people. Johnson is more devious, by virtue of being rather brighter, but that’s the only real difference.
You’re lucky. You bear no blame at all for the crash. Why try and pretend differently?
Someone following my tips this F1 season would be ahead in both the first and second halves. Behold my surprisingly profitable tips!
More regulations are useless if they are just an exercise in box ticking.
Frankly, I don't think that particular case needs arguing.
I am in the highly unfortunate position where I do effectively have to choose between them. For the first time in 18 years of voting in every election including parish council by-elections and the referendum for Ceredigion to have an elected mayor I am very seriously considering spoiling my ballot paper.
On the basis of these numbers the Tories are set for a majority of 43 seats, which corresponds closely with a number of other recent forecasts.
He’s a journalist. He lies with his mouth closed too.
Liverpool now 20 points ahead of Man Utd after today. I'll take that prescience!
I can read in that snippet quoted a pledge for a billion pounds next year and additional funding every year. Could you not read that?
As far as you are concerned he has deliberately mislead people in a systematic way, and this marks him out as uniquely dishonest. I see him as, at worst, like any other politician and, at best, more likely to say what he thinks.
I can’t recall a political character that led to two such different, honestly held, views of them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/32658907/election-2015-mp-thanks-voter-for-penis-ballot-paper-mark
A coalition of chaos?
Targetting funds specifically where it is required can be.
A good economist can tell you where you will see problems, but very few can tell you when.
No new legislation needed - just a motion accepting the report
I claim to be in something of an advantage over most people in making this assessment. A close relative was at Balliol with him. He wrote a perceptive and informaative article about Johnson several years ago. It remains one of the best pieces on the man I have ever read.
Allow me to send you the link.
Sadly they IMO termed a normal small oscillation in the business cycle in to a very significant economic downturn that we are still living with.
And will the Commission produce a new report that might supersede that before the next election?
What Xi does next is the main, and rather more alarming, question.