punter Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 well, the sheeple voted for it and now it's here, the government is borrowing $50bn a quarter to keep its rotten state funded and Cameron is fully signed up to it, so don't think anything is about to change that's $200bn a year for at least a few years, which everyone is going to be working hard to pay off in the form of permanently high taxes, fines and soaring inflation, all so we can employ a few more public sector fat cats this is your schools n' hospitals, lying on the alter of a decrepit, bankrupt state, who cannot fund them and so is going to inflate and destroy the economy for decades, yes decades to come. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/busi...icle4360643.ece Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubai Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 I despise nulab and everything they stand for (which is of course is themselves) but recall a time when the Tories used to stand for minimum gumment interference and therefore cost. What the hell are they doing???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1929crash Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 I despise nulab and everything they stand for (which is of course is themselves) but recall a time when the Tories used to stand for minimum gumment interference and therefore cost. What the hell are they doing???? But minimum governmental interference and all that was only ever empty rhetoric. The power of the state had to be harnessed to facilitate massive privatisations so as to transfer wealth to private corporations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubai Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 But minimum governmental interference and all that was only ever empty rhetoric. The power of the state had to be harnessed to facilitate massive privatisations so as to transfer wealth to private corporations. And look where that got us It really is time for a 'V' moment..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 And look where that got us It really is time for a 'V' moment..... All states rely upon the ability to use violence with no real opposition. Therefore all states expand until they completely collapse having - 1) No way of being stopped from without. 2) No feedback mechanism from within. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubai Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 All states rely upon the ability to use violence with no real opposition. Therefore all states expand until they completely collapse having - 1) No way of being stopped from without. 2) No feedback mechanism from within. Is that a quote or did you make it up.... if you did, it sounds very good. Lets hope this lot collapse soon.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Nice Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Is that a quote or did you make it up.... if you did, it sounds very good. Lets hope this lot collapse soon.... it doesn't really matter since the new group that would replace them will most likely go through the exact same process, if history is any example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1929crash Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 it doesn't really matter since the new group that would replace them will most likely go through the exact same process, if history is any example. Naw mate, this time it's different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Is that a quote or did you make it up.... if you did, it sounds very good. Lets hope this lot collapse soon.... Maybe they/it have/has (it's early, ooh my head) already collapsed, but as the dear ones involved continue as normal few have realised. ........... just like property value, it only exists on a window display. It's all an illusion anyway. One day you wake up on your home planet & wonder why you volunteered....again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 (edited) the problem is that idiot Brown when Chancellor was like a kid let loose in a sweet shop with a £50 note...his spending commitments mean even a modest downturn in the economy would take the annual deficit to £100 billion (7% of GDP).... He started off ok by even repaying some of the national debt but became more and more profligate as the each year passed Edited July 19, 2008 by Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash4781 Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Waiting for the RPI+2% index linked certs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Nice Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 (edited) the problem is that idiot Brown when Chancellor was like a kid let loose in a sweet shop with a £50 note...his spending commitments mean even a modest downturn in the economy would take the annual deficit to £100 billion (7% of GDP)....He started off ok by even repaying some of the national debt but became more and more profligate as the each year passed it's not so different from the HPC really. to keep the boom going it took more and more loans at higher and higher amounts, until ultimately a crash set in. government spending has been on the same course. every year more and more of the economy has been supported by government deficit spending, which requires more and more deficit spending to keep it all going. you are very likely to see the same kind of outcome as you do with houses. which is also why they can't just cut spending. that would have the same effect as the credit crunch did on mortgages. Edited July 19, 2008 by Mr Nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oracle Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 the problem is that idiot Brown when Chancellor was like a kid let loose in a sweet shop with a £50 note...his spending commitments mean even a modest downturn in the economy would take the annual deficit to £100 billion (7% of GDP)....He started off ok by even repaying some of the national debt but became more and more profligate as the each year passed The problem is that throughout the decades,whoever has got in has played the cycle. Labour is in power to provide a "creative destruction"...by over regulating everything. The consequence of this is business capital transfer from west to east....with socialisation of the burden by the taxpayer. the whole lot has a lagging effect,it's like growing vegetables. ..you plant the seeds,and have to wait a few months before you have a crop. when the tories get back in they will do the opposite of labour,and will bring capital back after a few years. ...don't get your hopes up on a quick fix,this probably isn't on the cards until 2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 It's a pity no one has got the money to challenge the govt on this in court. Not that they would win as I'm sure a few quiet words would be said to the judge to find in the govt favour but it could educate the public. Although most people aren't actually interested in this as they don't see the relevance to their own lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Although most people aren't actually interested in this as they don't see the relevance to their own lives. People are starting to see the relevance to their own lives as they take a drop in living standards. Our political system is broken and so the 3 main parties pretend the are in oposition when in fact they are all in bed togeather so don't think the Cons will do a dam thing apart from continuing to spin and blame the other side whilst increasing our taxes and removing our freedoms. MP's need to be accoutable to the public and this will not come about via the bollot box in a rigged system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 They saw a drop in living standards in the 70's and nothing happened. The lying ******* politicians will spin new lies to make people feel better and joe public will then think they know what they are doing. Nothing will alter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1929crash Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 They saw a drop in living standards in the 70's and nothing happened.The lying ******* politicians will spin new lies to make people feel better and joe public will then think they know what they are doing. Nothing will alter. I'm not sure that's true. 1976 is regarded by many as the happiest on record, notwithstanding the drought and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtm.../19/ccom119.xml Labour has led us into recession already in the red. To fund spending commitments and the extra spending bound to come in a recession from rising dole claims, they're going to have to borrow even more. And, of course, as they borrow more their income will fall as tax revenues decline along with economic activity. Their fiscal "rules" will be broken which is why the Treasury has been looking at rewriting the "rules" to give them the headroom to borrow the extra cash they need.My memories are still fresh of interviewing Alistair Darling in No.11 Downing Street last September, the day before the Northern Rock disaster first became apparent. He lectured me about the dangers of excessive lending and borrowing. His very words were: "They [borrowers] need to ask themselves, 'can I repay this?' and lenders need to ask themselves, 'If it goes wrong can I get it back?' People do need to think long and hard about this. One of the by-products of the current situation is that, not just at a high level but right across the piece, people will be a bit more cautious." Will they? Well yes, we will because as taxpayers and consumers we'll be forced to. But who's going to force the Government to stop its reckless and irresponsible behaviour? The salvation of the ballot box in 2010 is still a dangerously long time away as far as the deteriorating health of the economy is concerned. This week has confirmed many things, including the fact the lunatics really are running the asylum and clearing up the mess is going to be absolutely ghastly. Obviously Darling has thought long and hard about this and realised he's not the one going to have to pay all of this back so it's not an issue for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Darling knows he won't have to pay the money back as he won't be in charge after the next election so he doesn't care. So when taxes go up the rich will leave whilst we pay it off. Then when taxes get cut they will return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punter Posted July 19, 2008 Author Share Posted July 19, 2008 schools n' hospitals! there should be a constitutional provision that prevents any form of government borrowing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the primitive Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 All states rely upon the ability to use violence with no real opposition. Therefore all states expand until they completely collapse having - 1) No way of being stopped from without. 2) No feedback mechanism from within. Normally I scroll past your posts, but really... ALL states? Granted there's a few examples, but the vast majority of nation states would seem to contradict your doomstering... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubai Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Normally I scroll past your posts, but really...ALL states? Granted there's a few examples, but the vast majority of nation states would seem to contradict your doomstering... Er.... can you name any state that hasn't used the threat of violence against the public without any real threat of retaliation? I've racked my brains and can't actually think of one..... and I'm not p1ssed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uptherebels Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Er.... can you name any state that hasn't used the threat of violence against the public without any real threat of retaliation? I've racked my brains and can't actually think of one..... and I'm not p1ssed. Vatican? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubai Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Vatican? Wah wah waaaaah....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinker Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 Normally I scroll past your posts, but really...ALL states? Granted there's a few examples, but the vast majority of nation states would seem to contradict your doomstering... Yes all states function by the threat of violence, try refusing to pay your Council Tax and see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.