Balls Finally Admits The Truth!

[Thunderbird 900]

Blimey!!!

"There’s a revealing non-apology in today’s New Statesman. Ed Balls now accepts that there is a structural deficit – and that this is due, in part, to Labour’s excessive “investment” during the boom years"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielknowles/100081995/a-confession-from-honest-ed-balls/

[interestrateripoff]

For a moment I read this as Brown to admit he was impotent.

[Goat]

Labour’s excessive “investment”

[robbingXpat]

Investment in public sector 'non jobs', he meant to say ?

[Executive Sadman]

Ahh, the old Brown chestnut that 'we'll only borrow to invest in buildings and infrastructure'

...like housing benefit, child benefit and 101 other benefits aimed at getting people not to work.

[tim123]

Blimey!!!

"There’s a revealing non-apology in today’s New Statesman. Ed Balls now accepts that there is a structural deficit – and that this is due, in part, to Labour’s excessive “investment” during the boom years"

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielknowles/100081995/a-confession-from-honest-ed-balls/

Personally I don't think that's logically right

The structural deficit can't be caused "by spending too much in the past" because that implies (to me) that he is referring to capital expenditure.

But capital expenditure can't cause a structural deficit because it can be turned off (more or less) immediately.

What's caused the structural deficit is the decision to EMPLOY too many people.

And that's what he needs to admit to

tim

[Milton]

Labour admit some responsibility for being the cause of our misery?...........................Check todays date chaps and chapesses

[spongeh]

Gotta be an Aprils fools joke ... no way would that slimy little t*** admit something like that

[Big Orange]

What about flinging the borders wide open?

[Tankus]

ah............... but they didn't invest ...they PFI'd ....with bills coming in with Gordonballs name on it until 2058

[guitarman001]

It's only because everybody keeps bleating on about them not apologising for the mess they left. Now that they are do you think they are more likely to get voted in? I think so....

Just look at the news yesterday about the MPs going to jail... the folks on the street were saying how shameful it were but could not see the bigger picture.

[TwoWolves]

Personally I don't think that's logically right

The structural deficit can't be caused "by spending too much in the past" because that implies (to me) that he is referring to capital expenditure.

But capital expenditure can't cause a structural deficit because it can be turned off (more or less) immediately.

What's caused the structural deficit is the decision to EMPLOY too many people.

And that's what he needs to admit to

tim

Very good point. Not many people realise this important issue.

[Goat]

Personally I don't think that's logically right

The structural deficit can't be caused "by spending too much in the past" because that implies (to me) that he is referring to capital expenditure.

But capital expenditure can't cause a structural deficit because it can be turned off (more or less) immediately.

You mean Ed Bo11ocks is lieing - surely not!

[Timak]

Glad everyone now agrees there is a structural deficit.

Now if only everyone could agree on a definition that makes sense given that there is absolutely no empirical data to support any position on the subject.

If a government invests in the infrastructure of a country with the aim of bettering the lives of our population then it increases the "structural deficit". Does this make improving the lives of people a bad thing?

Of course if they then revise the GDP estimates upwards because of this infrastructure improvement then, whether GDP grows or not, the deficit is no longer structural but assigned to the "output gap" instead.

Likewise can spending on state employment be classed as being part of the structural deficit or is it just deficit spending - we seem to be assigning technical definitions to a tax gap between spending and investment.

The more you read about economics the more it sounds like tea-leaf reading mixed with political dogma.

Lets just say that when a government overspends it either needs to cut spending or increase taxes. If the investment pays off then taxes can be cut, or reserved for when tax income drops.

[PopGun]

What's caused the structural deficit is the decision to EMPLOY too many people.

but but we enjoyed a boom period, loads of private sector jobs out there filling the tax coffers.

Thing is Balls more than anyone knows this was infact complete and utter ballacks. Hence why despite feigning ignorance to the contrary, he actually knows full well why the state ended up employing far too many people during this so called boom period.

Edited April 1, 2011 by PopGun

[Bloo Loo]

For a moment I read this as Brown to admit he was impotent.

I have to admit to Altzheimers as I have no idea who you are talking about.

[THE BALD MAN]

but but we enjoyed a boom period, loads of private sector jobs out there filling the tax coffers.

Thing is Balls more than anyone knows this was infact complete and utter ballacks. Hence why despite feigning ignorance to the contrary, he actually knows full well why the state ended up employing far too many people during this so called boom period.

The coffers were filled from taxes from HPI and false accounting by the banks. We employed too many and overpaid many others on the gravy train..to buy votes..

[SHERWICK]

I have to admit to Altzheimers as I have no idea who you are talking about.

Here's a gentle reminder*:

(*perhaps not so gentle)