Who Should You Vote For?

[Guest]

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…..

[Smiffs]

It was a simple explanation to a simple person.

 

Carry on ignoring the basics if you want.

 

Spending more than you have is bad, and when you do you have to pay it back.

 

Do you understand or do you want to ask an economist?

[bgoefc]

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.

 

Female hormones are no different than mens and hormones are quite straightforward chemical structures made from amino acids, peptides, cholesterol or fatty acid derivatives . Testosterone and oestrogen are generally the two that are released in different quantities between the sexes, although oxytocin plays other roles in childbirth in wimin. However, the amounts of any released can vary between individuals  and their job is to open the doors of the workplace so things can happen. Sometimes though the locks of the doors get jammed so the hormones are redundant. 

 

Therefore on occasions there are more doors open than should be and on occasions more closed than should be open. Sometimes the doors are open when they should be closed and at others the things that unlock them are no longer around or are still asleep in bed when the factory doors need to be opened.

 

All very straightforward on the face of it, but its staggering how many times it goes wrong.

[MalcolmW]

We get very good government interest rates, largely on the basis that we are a stable country veering gently between mild socialism and liberal conservatism.

The stability of the country is very much in question due to the rise and rise of Scottish separatism.

The likelihood is that in the next week our government will be reduced to chaos.

At best a short-term fix can be applied, but the long-term standing of the country may result in a revision of the level of interest we pay. Just a little. But if things don't get better, they will increase just a little more. And so on.

[Smiffs]

Fuckin hell mate don't confuse it for us men even more

 

Sorry that was responding to bgeoxpl

Edited May 6, 2015 by Smiffs

[Guest]

It was a simple explanation to a simple person.

 

Carry on ignoring the basics if you want.

 

Spending more than you have is bad, and when you do you have to pay it back.

 

Do you understand or do you want to ask an economist?

 

But as I've said the critical thing is a) the terms of 'loans' and the fact that economic performance and thus 'income' is massively linked to spending on a national scale that on a household scale it absolutely isn't.

 

We've survived 300 years like this. I doubt that the world is going to end. The question is, are our priorities reducing the debt over the next 100 years and ignoring anything else.

 

Or do we look to grow a better more balanced economy and society with sensible borrowing and sensible and balanced economic policy using a sound and accepted evidence base. 

 

I know which camp I'm in.

[Whites man]

Female hormones are no different than mens and hormones are quite straightforward chemical structures

One small change to a chemical compound can change its properties subtlety. For example there is only one hydrogen bond more in Carling lager than in tramps piss.

[Smiffs]

I'd be in that camp too but don't believe for a minute red ed knows where it is.

 

There is nothing wrong with manageable debt. The original analogy was a reply to the claim that the tories have spent more than labour. They may well have, but when you have committed costs and out of control spending then it takes some reigning in until the level of spending is more manageable against the income.

 

On paper nobody would borrow 5 times their salary and spend 25 years paying it off but we do as it's both an investment and a necessity.

 

What you don't do is then put a Bentley on the front drive and hope you can keep up the repayments.

[Traf]

there is only one hydrogen bond more in Carling lager than in tramps piss.

 

I'm not convinced they're even that far apart.

 

I thought the equation was Tramp's Piss + C02 = Carling.

[Danny G]

Its ok running a deficit year after year providing overall debt as a ratio to GDP stays around the same. As an economy grows, the debt increases with the % staying around the same. The shit hits the fan when debt increases, the economy contracts i.e during a recession and the % to GDP goes through the roof.

[no balls]

SNP openly saying they're anti Tory on television tonight. Negative cunts sound like petulant children.

Edited May 6, 2015 by no balls

[Guest]

SNP openly saying they're anti Tory on television tonight. Negative cunts sound like petulant children.

It is their mantra, the very reason for their popularity.

 

To be fair it is no worse than the scaremongering campaign Cameron has run with respect to the SNP.

 

Part of me hopes that all these sonabitches find themselves in a configuration where they all have to work together for the greater good after tomorrow. Might be novel.....

[clown]

What it will do is put the country in no mans land for 6 months until another election.

 

SNP are 100% interested in Scotland and independence. The rest of it is noise. That's fact, not scaremongering. Do you know what SNP stands for?

[Guest]

What it will do is put the country in no mans land for 6 months until another election.

SNP are 100% interested in Scotland and independence. The rest of it is noise. That's fact, not scaremongering. Do you know what SNP stands for?

Duh....but they are successful in Scotland because they stand on a socialist anti-Tory mandate. They lost the referendum but will clean up in the GE because of this.

[Smiffs]

Another reason why the English should have had a vote the day after to fuck them off into the north sea.

[tomski]

Duh....but they are successful in Scotland because they stand on a socialist anti-Tory mandate. They lost the referendum but will clean up in the GE because of this.

I'm sorry fella but the SNP are a bunch of whiny little fuckwits who are popular because they pedal the we are hard done by, by the English bollocks that keeps Scotland and it's people happy to be second best.

[bgoefc]

Like I said before, if Cameron, Brown, Clegg and Miliband had not interfered last year with their unkept promises, lies and scaremongering, none of this would have mattered.

[Guest]

I'm sorry fella but the SNP are a bunch of whiny little fuckwits who are popular because they pedal the we are hard done by, by the English bollocks that keeps Scotland and it's people happy to be second best.

 

 

Which is a shame as Scotland has produced many ground breakers across many disciplines

[tomski]

Like I said before, if Cameron, Brown, Clegg and Miliband had not interfered last year with their unkept promises, lies and scaremongering, none of this would have mattered.

Wouldn't of made a difference. They were never going to break off. They like the safety of England and to blame the English for everything is easy.

[Guest]

But as I've said the critical thing is a) the terms of 'loans' and the fact that economic performance and thus 'income' is massively linked to spending on a national scale that on a household scale it absolutely isn't.

 

We've survived 300 years like this. I doubt that the world is going to end. The question is, are our priorities reducing the debt over the next 100 years and ignoring anything else.

 

Or do we look to grow a better more balanced economy and society with sensible borrowing and sensible and balanced economic policy using a sound and accepted evidence base. 

 

I know which camp I'm in.

 

 

I think we all know which camp you are in!

 

Spend

Tax and spend

Borrow and spend

 

 

But, above all, spend!

[tomski]

Which is a shame as Scotland has produced many ground breakers across many disciplines

Very true. Generally though They have the inferiority complex.

[tomski]

Which is a shame as Scotland has produced many ground breakers across many disciplines

. Edited May 6, 2015 by tomski

[no balls]

Wouldn't of made a difference. They were never going to break off. They like the safety of England and to blame the English for everything is easy.

and our money, they also like that.

[stevieb]

and our money, they also like that.

And Blackpool for their holidays

[Sweep]

Just seen the latest poll on the News at Ten, and they show that Labour and the SNP combined will have enough seats to get into power. Whoopee Do

 

Having said that, I've been in the car for about 6 hours today and have been listening to the lot of them on Five Live......I've given up caring who gets into power, they're all plums.