To think the last 10 years of austerity is being thrown away?

[Snowy111]

I know some of you will say it was a waste of time anyway, and we should spend and raise taxes to get out of national debt, but...

Osborne followed by Hammond were following the traditional Tory policy to reduce spending to get out of debt. People and services have suffered very badly over the last 10 years because of this. If the tories carried on with their policy for a few more years it would turn the trend of debt going up and the debt would start to reduce. It’s around £2 trillion, that around £60k owed for every person in the country on top of any personal debt people owe.

And BJ/Cummings are throwing it all away with their election bribes. The NI threshold rise, the spending promises. Plus the BJ brexit deal is worse for the economy than where we are now, so there’ll be less money coming in.

But people completely fall for the election bribes and don’t think that the tories will eventually revert to type. Austerity will come back again and it will be harder and longer because of the throwaways being given now.

But of course it’s always labour that are the irresponsible ones with the finances

Some of us are going to say it was a waste of time anyway because it was.

It might have been to keep our ratings, but as we are non EZ, the EU could not enforce the 3%. They could rap our knuckles if we went over that, but not a lot else. I note that France is almost always in breach of the 3%, but cites national security costs and gets away with it; and that Germany is also in breach for having too much money, but again, seems to escape sanctions.

Macron is trying to reign it in, we would probably get away with it, but our ratings did matter with London being a major financial hub.

People are ignoring that Labour ran on a policy of still reducing the deficit from 2010 to 2015, Brown had already earmarked 73 Billion YOY cutbacks and Milliband was vowing not to do away with austerity. Corbyn came in and while his 'fully costed' manifesto was to increase spending it was still geared towards reducing the deficit albeit via keynesian economics (problem with this model and why no one follows it is that no one wants to turn off the taps when things improve)

The numbers are too huge/too scary to contemplate. Its almost become the norm because it’s “serviceable” debt. It doesn’t even include past future pension liabilities which would make the debt figure even scarier.

It isn’t just a number though which doesn’t matter - the interest payments we are paying are huge, and are a significant proportion of UK outgoings, which would be better spent on public services id we could get the debt down.

I for one don’t think it’s acceptable just to keep borrowing more year on year, like we have been doing - it’s future generations yet again that will end up paying.

No, the deficit has been falling for the last decade meaning the total debt is now a lot less than it would have been if we'd continued with a huge annual deficit. Bigger debt means higher interest rates and higher repayments needing to be made, meaning the deficit would be bigger and the debt even bigger.

The deficit is now back to relatively low/manageable levels so it's the right time to start spending again. Back when the crash happened, the leading economists were saying it would be a "lost decade" to pay for it, and they have been proved right. The damage has now been rectified so we're good to go.

I can’t believe most Tory MPs think the spending spree is a good idea as it’s against the Tory ethos of living within your means - but if that’s what it takes to bribe the electorate...

Why was debt so massive?

Because Gordon Brown's deficit was growing each year despite his claims that we were booming. We weren't, he was just spending borrowed money. Don't forget his "balanced budget over the economic cycle", but he had to keep expanding the period of the cycle because debt was going up, not down! Yes, the banking crisis made things a lot worse, but things weren't particularly rosy before it either.

Agreed it is always Labour that bankrupts the country. Don’t remember any other party leaving a note at the Treasury saying there is no money left!

The outgoing government have always left private "joke" notes for the incoming government, the tories just decided to use it because that's the kind of arseholes they are, the same arseholes who implemented austerity even when Osbourne said there was no need for it and he couldn't believe people were accepting it.

The damage has not been rectified, we are 2 trillion in debt! Phillip Hammond is against the election bribe spending. There has been no new spending review to justify the spending!

Having a deficit of 9.9% does not equate to spending out of control. Especially as the figure was just after/in the midst of the financial crisis - which you yourself state?

You having economic illiteracy is not somehow the Tories being evil or for someone else to check their facts.

So given that our problems were due to the financial crisis, why didn’t the government ensure that banks paid their fair share to tidy up their mess?

I notice how you have ignored Browns commitments going into the 2010 election, and the deals Brown struck to banks to bail them out, and the paying back of said bailouts with added restrictions as somehow someone else needing to check their facts, being so partisan when you do not yourself understand the issue isn't a good look.

Maybe start by reading the fact check and work on from there.

the same arseholes who implemented austerity even when Osbourne said there was no need for it and he couldn't believe people were accepting it.

Another classic example of partisan bollocks and ignoring that Brown was also promising austerity, its just as ignorant to point out the above partisan bollocks as it is about the note left by labour.

User1497 you are right that the deficit was growing under Gordon brown but that was at a time when the debt was £1 trillion, before the banking crisis. I don’t agree it was good to increase the deficit (and therefore debt) but it was less irresponsible than what the tories are doing now

but it was less irresponsible than what the tories are doing now

I don't think you have a grasp of the whole deficit/debt situation. How is it less irresponsible, people are tired of austerity, Corbyn and Tories have offered spending increases as we can slowly bring down debt while our deficit spend is ~3%

Until the full manifestos come out we cannot say one way or another, but the Tories aren't proposing borrowing money to add to the deficit at this stage unlike corbyn with his nationalisation plans

Labour have fully costed plans at least. Tories have not.

Sorry to be cynical at the tories’ sudden compassion for those on low pay and their sudden realisation that public services are woefully funded, but it really sticks in my craw!

The tories aren’t proposing borrowing money to add to the deficit

Yes they are. They will increase the deficit and add to the debt with their spending promises. If they follow through that is.

They will increase the deficit and add to the debt with their spending promises. If they follow through that is

Aahh - but they promise to reduce taxes so that may stimulate the economy and provide more income for businesses which can increase employment and increase corporation tax so increasing Government income.

Don't you just love economic theory

Wish it was all so easy!

Labour have fully costed plans at least. Tories have not.

I think you have let your mask slip there from being a concerned Conservative supporter.

It was never fully costed and lots of manifesto pledges had to be rolled back in the run up to the vote.

I will give you this link as any other from the FT, economist etc will no doubt be shouted down as right wing.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-labour-2017-election-campaign-nhs-spending-plans-a8555621.html

Sorry to be cynical at the tories’ sudden compassion for those on low pay and their sudden realisation that public services are woefully funded, but it really sticks in my craw!

Have the Tories not increased minimum wage (remember labour are only promising to match the Tories gradual gain up to £10 an hour) lifted the personal allowance, stopped exclusivity on zero hour contracts.

You said in your OP you are worried people fall for the old bait and switch of electoral policies but then try and make out Labours was fully costed.

Concern trolling is such low effort.

I notice how you have ignored Browns commitments going into the 2010 election, and the deals Brown struck to banks to bail them out, and the paying back of said bailouts with added restrictions as somehow someone else needing to check their facts, being so partisan when you do not yourself understand the issue isn't a good look

😂

First of all, the Tories economic record is the one up for review here.

The “payback” - what payback are you talking about?

Tories aren't proposing borrowing money to add to the deficit at this stage unlike corbyn with his nationalisation plans

The Tories didn’t cost their last manifesto - according to your own link - so..... we don’t actually know 🤷🏻‍♀️

But how exactly will the Tories pay for all the money they’re planning to chuck back into public services.

The fact that they’re putting money back tells you that they know that they need this money to run effectively and that they know they’ve fucked it over.

Most economists who aren't actually madly right wing know that the best way to fix a failing economy is to give money to the poor. Trickle-down doesn't work and never has. Pumping money in at the bottom of the pile is the solution. So a new government needs to double the minimum wage and increase benefits, stop handing over billions to wholly ineffective private companies, raise corporate tax and the top rate of personal tax.

Absolutely @ReanimatedSGB

First of all, the Tories economic record is the one up for review here.

This is how you come bounding onto the thread

The Tories used the national debt as a reason for austerity. George Osborne talked about an economy built on debt. They also mixed up the messages with the deficit, wanting to remove the deficit.

That ignores that Brown was promising to implement austerity so it wasn't just a Tory consipiracy, and you have yet to prove that the Cons used the debt to implement austerity because it isn't true.

The “payback” - what payback are you talking about?

You implied the banks have got away scot free, are you not even sure of your own arguments now?

Brown was right to bail out the banks unless you wanted millions homeless, the goverment even stepped in by offering to pay the interest on mortgage payments, 95% of the banks have repayed the bailouts some years ago, someone like you should already be aware of this.

The Tories didn’t cost their last manifesto - according to your own link - so..... we don’t actually know

Neither did labour according to my link, it's not me pretending Labour is the saviour.

The fact that they’re putting money back tells you that they know that they need this money to run effectively and that they know they’ve fucked it over.

Could be that now deficit spend is back to managable levels they can ease the tap on spending again, someone with your obvious understaning of economics should be able to see the nuance in that surely.

If you want to political tub thump it really helps if you know what you are talking about.

Most economists who aren't actually madly right wing know that the best way to fix a failing economy is to give money to the poor.

No they don't, even the most madly left wing one's know there needs to be a mixed economy where you need investment and intensives to multi-nationals.

There is no one consensus among right or left leaning economists and to pretend otherwise is the same as believing astrology is accurate.

The majority of economists accept it isn't a science and there is no one defined route to take, it is people who are led by the media that believe its a binary situation.

For instance the majority of those who predicted the crash are generally right leaning bar a few notable left leaning economists, there has been a lot come out since with 20/20 vision who predicted a crash every year since the 90's, but no economist really wanted to reign in the credit bubble during the early 00's as it was following left leaning neolib economic principals.

To try and paint it as a simple right/left issue is ignorant of our globalised economy and think there is a simple fix, which no economists accept.

The majority of economists accept it isn't a science and there is no one defined route to take, it is people who are led by the media that believe its a binary situation.

There’s a lot of truth in this. Unfortunately that’s the nature of our party political FPTP system - maybe it’s that that needs to change. So that politicians compromise and are not so adversarial.

To add how your binary thinking is wrong :

raise corporate tax

The majority of economists accept there is a sweet spot and that actually lowering corp tax to some degree is has increased intake that is provable by stats and is a recognised trend.

top rate of personal tax

Tried recently in france, the mobile can move offshore, in fact the majority of the French who was going to be hit by this moved to london, they reduced it after a year, has been played out pretty much every time in recent years the same and was used as a stick for voting leave.

*double the minimum wage"

Not even the most rabid left wing economist is advocating this as they have a basic grasp of inflation.

stop handing over billions to wholly ineffective private companies

Nebulous feel good statement that has far to many caveats

Someone else with no real understanding of economics pretending its a simple black and white, tories bad, labour good scenario

I'm a fiscal conservative.
The ONE thing the Tory party did that I genuinely liked.
Tossed out in their rebranding exercise to become populists.
Hymph.