Lucifer Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 60% of the poll shown in red, the socialists support the government, it takes a lot of time for the " need handouts " to realise the right way to go . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolli_pop Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Erm, stimulating the private sector rather than the public? It may have escaped your notice that it is spending that got us in this mess in the first place, spending our way out won't work this time. The two aren't separate; cuts in the public sector have a knock-on effect in the private sector. At the moment the economy as a whole is stalled with a severe lack of demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 The two aren't separate; cuts in the public sector have a knock-on effect in the private sector. It's the other way around. You can't get away from cause and effect. At the moment the economy as a whole is stalled with a severe lack of demand. There's no shortage of demand at all. What we're short of is liquidity in the right places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Oh no? The myth that "no one saw the financial crisis coming" is one particularly favored by apologists for that utterly incompetent cretin, Crash Gordon. Vince Cable picked him up on his spendthrift ways back in 2003: LINK Who in the end turn out to be right about the prospects for grown in the British economy (HINT: It wasn't Crash Gordon). Stephen Roach - senior executive at Morgan Stanley LINK Nouriel Roubini LINK Robert Shiller LINK [YouTube video] Even Gordon Brown claims to have predicted the crisis: But Gordon, weren't you also an advocate of "light touch" regulation? Aren't you contradicting yourself there? Goldman Sachs Mortgage Fraud Confirms Gordon Brown's Responsibility for the Financial Crisis Wednesday1, once again you pluck a "fact" out of your ass and I come along and demolish it. How do Baaaaaarnsley Bill, spent your Friday day putting this garbage together, did the badgers runoff! You can find someone who has predicted something for every eventuality there has ever been. However nothing can change the facts that until the banking crisis, Labour had reduced public debt from that they had inherited from the Cons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 How do Baaaaaarnsley Bill, spent your Friday day putting this garbage together, did the badgers runoff! You can find someone who has predicted something for every eventuality there has ever been. However nothing can change the facts that until the banking crisis, Labour had reduced public debt from that they had inherited from the Cons. No they hadn’t 1997 Public Debt £352 billion 2007 Public Debt £534 billion 1010 Public Debt £909 billion 1997 household debt £500bn 2010 household debt £1,158bn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fine line Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Labour had reduced public debt from that they had inherited from the Cons. You are either totally stupid and beleive your own BS, or you are insulting everyone else's intelligence. It is against Tory instincts to get into too much public debt, whereas the opposite is true with Labour. In 1997 Labour inherited from John Major an economy in great shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 No they hadn’t 1997 Public Debt £352 billion 2007 Public Debt £534 billion 1010 Public Debt £909 billion 1997 household debt £500bn 2010 household debt £1,158bn YES they did, as a %of GDP, see my earlier post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 You are either totally stupid and beleive your own BS, or you are insulting everyone else's intelligence. It is against Tory instincts to get into too much public debt, whereas the opposite is true with Labour. In 1997 Labour inherited from John Major an economy in great shape. You haven't got any, GetItDone, OneOfTheseDays! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Originally Posted by wednesday1 View Post Labour had reduced public debt from that they had inherited from the Cons. 1997 Public Debt £352 billion 2007 Public Debt £534 billion 1010 Public Debt £909 billion YES they did, as a %of GDP, see my earlier post. Nope the debt was defiantly higher; the fact they had a higher GDP gave them the opportunity to pay down the debt but they chose to increase it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fine line Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 You haven't got any, GetItDone, OneOfTheseDays! Hahahahahaha. You're on the ropes so you resort to this crap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.