I would have bet my bottom dollar I'd be conservative or at a push ukip but I've got lib fucking dem.

 

I think it's spending too much time on here with you bedwetting hand wringing yoghurt knitting teacher lovers!

 

www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/

 

 

The Mrs just answered and got UKIP after thinking she'd get lib dem.

 

Someone debunk this as bullshit please.

 

You can also use this as a reminder that you have until the 20th of April to register to vote.

I will try and put it in simple terms for you so you understand.

 

You know when your wife has signed up to shitloads of credit cards and spunked it up the wall on fuck knows what, filled a spare room with clothes she's never going to wear from the catalogue lady, and got the builder to put a huge extension on the side of the house which he's being paid for over a 50 year deal costing 8 times its real value, the debts need to be serviced somehow.

 

Except she also spent the savings you trusted her to keep in the knicker draw when you were earning decent coin. There's also some dodgy blokes knocking on the door with court orders to seize anything of value unless you pay up some cash. Like now.

 

You then got laid off and took a job on half the money you were used to.

 

So you're a bit fucked.

 

The solution starts with cutting the cards up and paying it back as best as you can whilst at the same time trying to pay the mortgage. If you remortgage or swap the debt to low interest cards then it's the first step to a long painful path of recovery. Not ideal but you're options are limited.

 

At the same time the wife is moaning daily because she's now in lidl instead of waitrose and the kids don't get to go on the school skiing trip with Tarquin and Lilly (who's father is a bastards working for the RBS, but such is life). She's got less money in her purse but your slowly eating into the mess and your hard work is being noticed so your wage is slowly creeping back up so the ratio of what you earn to what you have to pay out is getting better than it was.

 

You're still a cunt because you chopped up the credit cards and she's stopped piping you off until you buy her a new handbag. You're response is to carry on having a morning wank in the shower instead.

 

The solution ends with never trusting the daft bitch with money again until she's proven to be sensible with it. And even then you'll always have one eye on her.

 

Not a good analogy. In fact the very problem with the rhetoric around this is that people think that a national economy is the same as a household one. It is convenient to try and think of it in those terms. But about as much use a chocolate fireguard. 

I will try and put it in simple terms for you so you understand.

 

You know when your wife has signed up to shitloads of credit cards and spunked it up the wall on fuck knows what, filled a spare room with clothes she's never going to wear from the catalogue lady, and got the builder to put a huge extension on the side of the house which he's being paid for over a 50 year deal costing 8 times its real value, the debts need to be serviced somehow.

 

Except she also spent the savings you trusted her to keep in the knicker draw when you were earning decent coin. There's also some dodgy blokes knocking on the door with court orders to seize anything of value unless you pay up some cash. Like now.

 

You then got laid off and took a job on half the money you were used to.

 

So you're a bit fucked.

 

The solution starts with cutting the cards up and paying it back as best as you can whilst at the same time trying to pay the mortgage. If you remortgage or swap the debt to low interest cards then it's the first step to a long painful path of recovery. Not ideal but you're options are limited.

 

At the same time the wife is moaning daily because she's now in lidl instead of waitrose and the kids don't get to go on the school skiing trip with Tarquin and Lilly (who's father is a bastards working for the RBS, but such is life). She's got less money in her purse but your slowly eating into the mess and your hard work is being noticed so your wage is slowly creeping back up so the ratio of what you earn to what you have to pay out is getting better than it was.

 

You're still a cunt because you chopped up the credit cards and she's stopped piping you off until you buy her a new handbag. You're response is to carry on having a morning wank in the shower instead.

 

The solution ends with never trusting the daft bitch with money again until she's proven to be sensible with it. And even then you'll always have one eye on her.

++++++++++1

Not a good analogy. In fact the very problem with the rhetoric around this is that people think that a national economy is the same as a household one. It is convenient to try and think of it in those terms. But about as much use a chocolate fireguard.

Rubbish, cut away the crap and essentially you are at the same point.

 

Greeks overspent because they had access to cheap money as they are in the Eurozone and now are facing the consequences. Why is that not like someone going nuts with a 0% credit card?

Rubbish, cut away the crap and essentially you are at the same point.

 

Greeks overspent because they had access to cheap money as they are in the Eurozone and now are facing the consequences. Why is that not like someone going nuts with a 0% credit card?

Sounds like me in the height of the boom in early 00's.

 

It was fucking ace. I went in the Abby National to put a cheque in and came out with £2k overdraft aged 19. Party time

Rubbish, cut away the crap and essentially you are at the same point.

 

Greeks overspent because they had access to cheap money as they are in the Eurozone and now are facing the consequences. Why is that not like someone going nuts with a 0% credit card?

 

They were overspending before they adopted the Euro. Their problems were that income was going down as a result of tax evasion and general Greek inefficiency. 

 

The analogy completely falls down because countries borrow over much longer terms than individuals and at more favourable rates. But also because if I stop spending anything, it in no way affects my income. My expenditure and income are not linked in the same way a nation's is. If you have growth and then cut you probably at least slow if not stop that growth and as a result your spending might go down but your deficit go up.

 

That is absolutely different to my own local household. 

You mean the Global Economic Crisis caused by irresponsible banking practices? Banks who were bailed out under Gordon Brown, potentially avoiding an even bigger disaster? What do you think the Conservatives would've done in that position? Let the banks die?

Hang on, I never said the Tories would have done anything different. I simply said the economic circumstances were/are completely different and so cannot be compared.

They were overspending before they adopted the Euro. Their problems were that income was going down as a result of tax evasion and general Greek inefficiency.

 

The analogy completely falls down because countries borrow over much longer terms than individuals and at more favourable rates. But also because if I stop spending anything, it in no way affects my income. My expenditure and income are not linked in the same way a nation's is. If you have growth and then cut you probably at least slow if not stop that growth and as a result your spending might go down but your deficit go up.

 

That is absolutely different to my own local household.

You missed the part about cutting away the crap.

Smiffs, this wife in your analogy... She wasn't a teacher by any chance?

Not a good analogy. In fact the very problem with the rhetoric around this is that people think that a national economy is the same as a household one. It is convenient to try and think of it in those terms. But about as much use a chocolate fireguard.

Bollocks if you want to fill your head with economic science from conflicting academics and the like.

 

It's fucking simple.

 

Page 1.

 

Try not spend more than you bring in. Whether it's a pie shop or a country the theory works on first principle.

 

The rest is then financial management beit through investment or debt. There is a fine line between the two.

Smiffs, this wife in your analogy... She wasn't a teacher by any chance?

 

what a stupid question.....more importantly HBAHT

I'd say the bits round her waist are 48g

A'm thinking aboot this votin for some wanker in a suit day, thir's th' Nationalists 'n' Labour, baith a load o' pish, if ye'r a worker in bonnie scotland thir's ainlie yin answer tae this madness, th' answer's Socialist Labour mah mukker, let me tell ye noo, ah see na ither wey...

 

 

Tha' Socialist Labour Party o' Scotland - Bridie 'n' dram tae th' workers, especially dram.

 

(That wis a Pairtie Political Broadcast oan behauf o' Th' Socialist Labour Pairtie in bonnie Scotland).

Bollocks if you want to fill your head with economic science from conflicting academics and the like.

It's fucking simple.

Page 1.

Try not spend more than you bring in. Whether it's a pie shop or a country the theory works on first principle.

The rest is then financial management beit through investment or debt. There is a fine line between the two.

I mean you're right, why listen to people who study and know about this stuff and are as highly awarded for it as is possible, when we could just listen to what you reckon.

They were overspending before they adopted the Euro. Their problems were that income was going down as a result of tax evasion and general Greek inefficiency. 

 

The analogy completely falls down because countries borrow over much longer terms than individuals and at more favourable rates. But also because if I stop spending anything, it in no way affects my income. My expenditure and income are not linked in the same way a nation's is. If you have growth and then cut you probably at least slow if not stop that growth and as a result your spending might go down but your deficit go up.

 

That is absolutely different to my own local household. 

 

But the Greeks never did (and never have) meet the conditions laid down for entry into the Euro.

It's as if you could self-certify to get a mortgage. That could never happen in real life.

Oh, wait a minute.

 

The interest required of the Greeks is ludicrously high as no-one expects them to be able to pay.

Why not allow them a debt management plan where the interest is written off?

I think with the more presidential-style elections, local has, unfortunately, disappeared.

 

Many are voting "Cameron or Miliband", neither of whom appeared on my postal vote

Councillors I've always gone for the bod who lived closest to me.

 

MPs I've voted for different parties based on either the candidate or last times protest vote for the pirate party. Other than when Boris visited bury market for a black pudding I've not seen owt on the tory spod.

I mean you're right, why listen to people who study and know about this stuff and are as highly awarded for it as is possible, when we could just listen to what you reckon.

 

I agree with the gist of what he says and studied Economics at a proper uni, not a former polytechnic of Fulchester type place. Does that make me qualified to have an opinion?

I mean you're right, why listen to people who study and know about this stuff and are as highly awarded for it as is possible, when we could just listen to what you reckon.

 

Spot on, I need to understand from the experts on behavioral and social facets of systemic risk‎, business cycle theory, capitalism, consumer theory‎ , globalism‎, Iistitutional economics‎, keynesian economics‎, monetarism‎, neoclassical economics‎, new institutional economics‎, post-keynesian economics, rational choice theory‎,time-based economics‎ and value theory so I can make an informed choice otherwise I'm going to be screwed.‎

There won't be any economists on our ark spaceship leaving for another star in about a sixty thousand years, fact.

I agree with the gist of what he says and studied Economics at a proper uni, not a former polytechnic of Fulchester type place. Does that make me qualified to have an opinion?

Surely studying these things and knowing about them are two disparate things? Which is why when they want a soundbite they ask some economist from JP Morgan or somewhere rather than Professor Beardedtwat from said former poly?

I mean you're right, why listen to people who study and know about this stuff and are as highly awarded for it as is possible, when we could just listen to what you reckon.

 

 

Economics is not a science

I mean you're right, why listen to people who study and know about this stuff and are as highly awarded for it as is possible, when we could just listen to what you reckon.

Now you're just being a penis.

Surely studying these things and knowing about them are two disparate things? Which is why when they want a soundbite they ask some economist from JP Morgan or somewhere rather than Professor Beardedtwat from said former poly?

 

They invite Stephanie Flanders from JP Morgan because she was previously BBC Economics editor, she has dated both Eds and her dad used to perform funny songs from his wheelchair.

Surely studying these things and knowing about them are two disparate things? Which is why when they want a soundbite they ask some economist from JP Morgan or somewhere rather than Professor Beardedtwat from said former poly?

Indeed but what happens when an economic guru from another equally established practice has a different opinion, as is commonplace?

 

 

If it wasn't so then no economy would ever struggle. They'd simply flick to page whatever of the policy and proceedings manual and find the required solution.

 

Everything, absolutely everything (apart from understanding female hormones), starts with a very simple and basic logic. Man make fire, man make spaceship.

 

Anyone with an IQ greater than an egg should be able to work out what that first principle is.

They invite Stephanie Flanders from JP Morgan because she was previously BBC Economics editor, she has dated both Eds and her dad used to perform funny songs from his wheelchair.

And her brother lives next door to Homer Simpson.

Now you're just being a penis.

 

If you like. But at the same time just repeating a mantra, despite all the evidence to the contrary suggests and entrenched position that cannot be re-considered at all.

 

If you genuinely believe national economics is just the same as household economics then look at how many years in the past 100 we've run a deficit. How many years as a household would you spend more than you earn? From 1979-1996 the economy was in deficit for ALL but two years. In other words for every single year under Major and all bar two under Thatcher we added to the public debt, year on year on year. From 1997-2010 Labour managed 4 years of surplus. So 4 years they cleared some of the debt rather than added to it.

 

In fact we've been running a deficit for the vast majority of the past 100 years. In fact the past 300 years.

 

If we take your very crude and simplified analogy that our national economy is exactly like a household one and once you've spent up you can't afford to get into debt and you have to sort it out then why have we for most of the 20th and 21st century carried on with a budget deficit? With different political environments different political parties and different leaders, the deficit continues. 

 

If genuinely your theory is true, then we should have been screaming decades and decades and decades ago to stop spending and clear the debt. In fact we should all empty our bank accounts now and pay back as much of this debt immediately. 

 

Or as the national economy is just the same as a household debt, lets all spend 10% more than we earn year on year, because as your theory states they are exactly the same principle. We've got over 300 years of spending more than we earn before anyone says boo…..