[Evil Diesel]

Originally Posted by NFS

That's a very politically biased set of statements. I don't see how you can possible separate this to an extent where you can argue that Labour are responsible for everything that is bad about our current situation and that everything Thatcher did was good. Didn't Thatcher introduce the right to buy for council housing, ultimately leading us to volatile and inflationary house prices and successive crashes?

We have an increased debt, because labour have borrowed to bail out the banks, which IS the direct result of a global crisis. SteveA is right that the UK has suffered through this because we don't have a manufacturing economy, but Germany hasn't emerged unscathed either.

The main issue we have going forward is a reliance on financial services. Both Governments argue that the way out of this is a science based economy, where we do the inventing and places like China, with low wages do the building.

There is no gap between the parties on this.

The UK debt mess has nothing to do with the bank bailouts. The accounts show that the assets jsut about offset the liabilities here although I imagine if £100bn of RBS paper was dumped onto the market this would not be the case.

Labour ran a structural deficit since 2000 of circa 4% GDP which has now risen to 13% GDP - the forcast for the current fiscal year I recall was £168bn - this deficit is the rate we are adding to the debt pile not the total debt pile as much of the media is content to let people believe.

As I have said earlier I cannot envisage how this could ever be repaid without a form of default. When the bond markets wake up to this (which is happening now - ie Greek 2 year notes are trading at about 19%) we will pay substantially more interest. As I pointed out earlier it currently takes every note and coin in circulation to cover the annual interest on a £1tr debt pile at current interest rates.

The markets are not likely to allow sufficient time for UK Plc to rebalance itself - that is what should have been happening over the last few years.

All I can see going forward is a shit load of pain whoever has the misfortune to win the election.

[dxb335d]

Will interest rates go up in the future?

[dar2008]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Will interest rates go up in the future?

Maybe.

[rogerxp]

I think I'd be a bit more pessimistic - try DEFINATELY!!! I'm hoping it'll max out at 6% (otherwise there'll be a lot of very f*cked up households out there!!).

Hung Parliment = stock market dip, interest rates rise, sterling value drop, followed by eventual dusting off and getting back onto our feet; slowly; very very slowly. Any other outcome, not sure, but interest rises surely a certainly (they can't stay this low forever; unfortunately).

[Steve A]

Originally Posted by SteveC

When you can buy coal on the World market for substantially less than it costs you to produce, your mines are no longer viable

When the steel that you produce is not competitive on World markets because the wages and benefits you pay are far higher than other countries, you can't sell it, so there's no point producing it.

When car companies decided to move production out of the UK because they were losing too much productivity due to strikes and wildcat action...the result of the failure of a Labour Government to stand up to their Union paymasters, its pointless blaming subsequent Tory governments for the loss.

Ill try this again. I just got to the end of a 30 minute reply and the bloody computer crashed (must be a Tory) so ill keep this brief


UK OIL FIELDS
I noticed you completley ignored my comment about the Oil industry. Are you a politician Thatcher should not of sold it. It was of massive worth and it was sold. The company running it makes a lot of money. It damaged the UK economy then and still to this day. It was a BIG mistake you cant deny this. FACT

UK COAL MINES
With some restructuring http://www.ukcoal.com/company-information this can happen. Still mining UK coal, 3100 employees, supply 6% of the UK electricity market, UK jobs boosting the UK economy. FACT It may be more expensive than chinese coal but people/companies still buy it. Why? just the same reason you choose to buy German cars (merc/bmw) and not russian, because quality of product and trust of supply costs money The UK mines could still be employing 10,000s of UK people making moeny for the UK taking stress off the benefits system, earning tax etc etc.

UK STEEL
Have you heard of Corus part of TATA? the UK arm makes money FACT ve just had a look at there books so the sames apply as above.

UK CAR INDUSTRY

I agree the Unions and labour was a disaster and could have been handled differently, ive always said they have made mistakes, but your posts reads like a party political broadcast.ie sounds and looks good but it isnt the whole truth, the industry should have been saved.

In my books manufacturing boosts the economy and people buy British look at the Chinese with MG etc

But like me your entitled to your opinion, however biased yours may be.

Now then regarding the state of the economy. I know printing money causes inflation, look at Argentina and Zimbabwe they print a shit load of money and it costs 100000000000000000000000000000000000000pebbles to buy a loaf of bread, but how does the UK bail out the banks without doing it. And if the banks had gone bust we'd all be well and truly fucked, they print money it boosts the economy short term and there is a price to pay, future debt. IMO better that than what could have happened.

Whichever government gets in they will

1. increase taxes
2. lower public spending
3. lie, lie lie.

The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer and ill still slag the tories off

[SteveC]

I think if we discussed this long enough and enjoyed enough beers we'd probably end up occupying common ground. I certainly can't disagree with your conclusions!
As regards political allegiances I would vote for anyone I believe will bring a degree of competence to the management of UK PLC. From my perspective Labor are utterly incompetent and obsessed with staying in power by creating yet more dependants. If we had a 'Common Sense and Fair Play' party that managed the economy responsibly, looked after educating our kids and cared for the old, vulnerable and infirm in the best way possible, without always trying to score political points I have a feelng they'd get both our votes.

Anyway Steve, I repect your arguments

Cheers!

SteveC

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by Evil Diesel

The UK debt mess has nothing to do with the bank bailouts. The accounts show that the assets jsut about offset the liabilities here although I imagine if £100bn of RBS paper was dumped onto the market this would not be the case.

Labour ran a structural deficit since 2000 of circa 4% GDP which has now risen to 13% GDP - the forcast for the current fiscal year I recall was £168bn - this deficit is the rate we are adding to the debt pile not the total debt pile as much of the media is content to let people believe.

As I have said earlier I cannot envisage how this could ever be repaid without a form of default. When the bond markets wake up to this (which is happening now - ie Greek 2 year notes are trading at about 19%) we will pay substantially more interest. As I pointed out earlier it currently takes every note and coin in circulation to cover the annual interest on a £1tr debt pile at current interest rates.

The markets are not likely to allow sufficient time for UK Plc to rebalance itself - that is what should have been happening over the last few years.

All I can see going forward is a shit load of pain whoever has the misfortune to win the election.

Like any household that's in debt....decreased spending and increased loan repayments (higher taxes). Neither messages that would get a party elected, but reality non-the-less.

What we're now seeing goes to the very heart of democracy.... voters will not vote for good management when it involves an extended period of austerity.
SteveC

[Steve A]

Originally Posted by SteveC

I think if we discussed this long enough and enjoyed enough beers we'd probably end up occupying common ground. I certainly can't disagree with your conclusions!
As regards political allegiances I would vote for anyone I believe will bring a degree of competence to the management of UK PLC. From my perspective Labor are utterly incompetent and obsessed with staying in power by creating yet more dependants. If we had a 'Common Sense and Fair Play' party that managed the economy responsibly, looked after educating our kids and cared for the old, vulnerable and infirm in the best way possible, without always trying to score political points I have a feelng they'd get both our votes.

Anyway Steve, I repect your arguments

Cheers!

SteveC

I agree with you , id love a Common Sense and Fair Play as you describe, but we know it'll never come to pass.

Anyway ive got what i want to say off my chest ill let this thread go now.

Steve If you ever come to a meet ill gladly buy you a pint.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Evil Diesel

The UK debt mess has nothing to do with the bank bailouts. The accounts show that the assets jsut about offset the liabilities here although I imagine if £100bn of RBS paper was dumped onto the market this would not be the case.

Labour ran a structural deficit since 2000 of circa 4% GDP which has now risen to 13% GDP - the forcast for the current fiscal year I recall was £168bn - this deficit is the rate we are adding to the debt pile not the total debt pile as much of the media is content to let people believe.

As I have said earlier I cannot envisage how this could ever be repaid without a form of default. When the bond markets wake up to this (which is happening now - ie Greek 2 year notes are trading at about 19%) we will pay substantially more interest. As I pointed out earlier it currently takes every note and coin in circulation to cover the annual interest on a £1tr debt pile at current interest rates.

The markets are not likely to allow sufficient time for UK Plc to rebalance itself - that is what should have been happening over the last few years.

All I can see going forward is a shit load of pain whoever has the misfortune to win the election.

I agree with everything you have written apart from the 1st sentence. We had lots of debt, then we borrowed a LOT more to bail out the banks. We will get the bank money back at some point, possibly with a profit, but we will still have lots of debt

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=206

These numbers show the structural deficit you are talking about. They also show where labour came in in 1997. At that stage debt was about 42.5% of GDP and we were below that right through until 2007 when the shit hit the fan globally. That's why you can't blame the current situation on Labour alone.

Any company with 42.5% gearing would have been considered conservative in those days, but clearly it's also true that UK economy was being driven harder than the rest of Europe.

For now UK PLC still has a AAA rating and we aren't the only country at risk of downgrade:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=a0a8xAghPS8I

Clearly we don't want a downgrade (that would be very bad news), but I think it's wrong to be swept up in the idea that the size of our debt is an automatic route to default.

Lot's of businesses have had to re-profile their debt, because their gearing looked bad post crisis. It's not that they couldn't keep up the payments, it's simply that we have a different view on debt now than we did before the crash.

I can see both sides unfortunately, we need to stop pissing money away, but we also need to protect a fragile economy for the short term. I suspect that the Conservatives will get into panic cuts to appease the masses and I fear that Labour will not do enough.

Either way, I agree that it's not an ideal situation for the next Govt.

[NFS]

By the way the annual interest charges on a £900,000,000,000 mortgage over 25 years at 5% would be £45billion.

There are around 32m taxpayers, so I make that £1,406.25 each

[rup]

Originally Posted by prt71

Do you genuinely think we would have avoided the current mess under a different government?

Yes, 1 MILLION % Yes.
Hope that's clear

[prt71]

Originally Posted by rup

Yes, 1 MILLION % Yes.
Hope that's clear

Making us unique (apart from Australia) amongst the developed economies?

[Evil Diesel]

Originally Posted by NFS

By the way the annual interest charges on a £900,000,000,000 mortgage over 25 years at 5% would be £45billion.

There are around 32m taxpayers, so I make that £1,406.25 each

OK - so at £1tn the annual interest is equal to M0 ie all notes and coins in circulation. This is interest alone - does nothing to address the repayment of debt.

I also disagree to the gearing point - this is proportion of debt to capital value - you cannot calssify UK GDP as a capital value to the UK government - around 50% GDP accounted for by public sector spending - this is not wealth!

[rup]

Originally Posted by prt71

Making us unique (apart from Australia) amongst the developed economies?

Really? Is France borrowing £170 billion a year? No
Is Germany borrowing £170 billion a year? No
And many other examples....
The only country with a similar defecit to us is Greece and we all know what's happening to them!

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Evil Diesel

OK - so at £1tn the annual interest is equal to M0 ie all notes and coins in circulation. This is interest alone - does nothing to address the repayment of debt.

I also disagree to the gearing point - this is proportion of debt to capital value - you cannot calssify UK GDP as a capital value to the UK government - around 50% GDP accounted for by public sector spending - this is not wealth!

Repayment would be £63.9 billion or £ 1,997 per taxpayer.

I don't think this is a good thing, I'd much rather have debt at 1997 levels (£352 billion). Frankly I'm undecided on the bank bail out. I see arguments for and against, but in the end, if we get our money back out, then it's almost irrelevant.

By mentioning gearing, I was just trying to illustrate the fact that the world felt differently about debt a couple of years ago. I realise GDP is not the same as market cap.

[prt71]

Originally Posted by rup

Really? Is France borrowing £170 billion a year? No
Is Germany borrowing £170 billion a year? No
And many other examples....
The only country with a similar defecit to us is Greece and we all know what's happening to them!

France & Germany aren't doing that well......

"The UK fared less well, featuring as one of twelve member states recording a debt ratio to GDP of more than 60%. It recording a public debt ratio of 68.1 per cent, putting it in eighth place behind Italy (115.8%), Greece (115.1%), Belgium (96.7%), Hungary (78.3%), France (77.6%), Portugal (76.8%), Germany (73.2%) and Malta (69.1%)."

[rogerxp]

I watched last nights debate and have come out non-the-wiser who to vote for. I'm almost certainly going to vote with the Tory's but there are a few bits that I'm still struggling with. The way I see it (and I'm ignoring Lib Dems as I'm just not feeling what they're standing for except trying to be everyone's friend; no room for friends at present I'm afraid) is this -:

Labour
I hate Gordon Brown with a passion.
He puts up a very good arguement for supporting the economy for a while longer
Surely we can't keep borrowing more money (I've stopped so why can't the government)
Don't trust him to make cuts in the right places and therefore screw us all over one way or another with higher tax in the future (don't forget I'm a business owner & an individual)
Been in power for 13 years (yet only now do they 'sound' like they've got a plan) - not sure how to phrase what I'm thinking here!

Conservative
Quite like David Cameron (best of a bad bunch )
Agree things need to be cut; effectively and fast
In saying the above I'm about to cut £1k child tax credit from my household income
We need to stop borrowing, sort out the banks, and box clever
I'm a bit hazy on the IHT situation

Now, by my own admittion, I'm not big on politics, nor have I paid much interest before (TV debates possible a good thing), so historical references are all new to me. I just don't know who to beleive.

I can see both arguments so hand picking the best from both parties seems sensible - shame that probably won't be possible.

As for the TV Debates, I do wish they'd allow a) audience participation (not heckeling but just some reaction) and b) the 'chair' to really challenge specific points and put the leaders on the spot.

[doughboy]

Couldn't give a toss who is in charge - we're not voting for a President.

The policies and philosophies of the party is what matters to me. - Give us less state interference and more individual responsibility please.

Most important for me is stopping the ID card / National Identity register / NHS spine / Contact point child database / unlawful Police DNA databases / unlawful ANPR journey storage / 2 year storage of ALL your phone calls and now all your web access details etc... the nepotism, hyprocrisy, oppression of freedom and state secrecy just goes on and on with Stazi Labour in charge.

Anyone but Labour is a better bet.

Tories will never win in Manchester as it's full of people who think they are 'gritty working class northerners' and misguided people who actually think that labour are still a socialist party rather than a bunch of 60's Marxists & communist students hell bent on ruining the very fabric of our society in order that we become helpless on our own and have to fall to the state for everything.

I'm a Tory, but up here Lib dems will get my vote just to get Labour out.

[rogerxp]

Originally Posted by doughboy

I'm a Tory, but up here Lib dems will get my vote just to get Labour out.

Now you've lost me, you're a Tory but going to vote Lib Dem, to get Labour out. Why not just vote Tory. Sorry, probably missing a really obvious point (showing my naivety here).

[doughboy]

Originally Posted by rogerxp

Now you've lost me, you're a Tory but going to vote Lib Dem, to get Labour out. Why not just vote Tory. Sorry, probably missing a really obvious point (showing my naivety here).

Tories will never win in Manchester (central area) for the reasons above. They lost their deposit at the last council election, got beat by the Greens and a few loonys.

The only way to get Labour out of this seat is to vote Lib Dem as they are pretty close to labour at recent elections. Voting for anyone else in this area will just keep Labour in by default.

Withington seat went to Lib Dems in this way after 30 years of Labour at the last general election.

Hopefully same will happen here. Unfortunately here, voting tory at the moment is a wasted vote.

[SiKkBaSs]

Originally Posted by rogerxp

Now you've lost me, you're a Tory but going to vote Lib Dem, to get Labour out. Why not just vote Tory. Sorry, probably missing a really obvious point (showing my naivety here).

Lib dems are probably the most likely to take out Labour in that specific constituency. Voting Tory in his constituency would almost be like a wasted vote...I assume, so he's tactical voting.

This happens a lot in highly polarised constituencies because of the plurality voting system.

[doughboy]

Yep.

This area has been labour for ever, 80% of the vote in the past.

There's masses of huge council estates round here with 10,000's of 'working class' (i.e plenty on the sick / dole / rob) people in them.

People want labour out but just can't face (or admit to) voting Tory, so the Lib Dems are the only way to get labour out. I though about putting a tory poster up to annoy the neighbours, but I seriously think we'd get a brick through the window.

The only reason Labour are in government is their reliance on northern inner city constituencies where they hold huge number of seats historically.

These seats are what needs to change away from Labour to kill their majority.

People just think - 'I live a northern city by 'eck so I must vote for labour'