UK General Election 2015

[DungBeetle]

btw here is public spending in 2010

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2010UKbn_14bc1n_80#ukgs302


and here it is in 2014

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

There isn't really very much evidence of Labour's profligacy and George's austerity.  He did though manage to scare everyone when he took office nearly causing the economy to tumble back into recession.

I think showing 2010 labour spend isn't really the reason why the country is busto.  Try publishing the previous 8 years then we might see where the issues with over spend were with the loony lefties pre 2007 banking crisis.

What? The 2008 crisis wasn't a public spending crisis man.

You need to distinguish between the credit crisis and the public spending.  If we ignore the regulation side, the credit crisis had little to do with Labour.   However, the insanity of running budget deficits during a crack boom between 2002 and 2007 when the tax receipts were rolling in meant that we were in a far worse position to counter the credit crisis with increased Government spending than if we had been more disciplined.

Brown convinced himself that he had created a permanent boom - madness.

[Woodsey]

btw here is public spending in 2010

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2010UKbn_14bc1n_80#ukgs302


and here it is in 2014

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

There isn't really very much evidence of Labour's profligacy and George's austerity.  He did though manage to scare everyone when he took office nearly causing the economy to tumble back into recession.

I think showing 2010 labour spend isn't really the reason why the country is busto.  Try publishing the previous 8 years then we might see where the issues with over spend were with the loony lefties pre 2007 banking crisis.

What? The 2008 crisis wasn't a public spending crisis man.

You need to distinguish between the credit crisis and the public spending.  If we ignore the regulation side, the credit crisis had little to do with Labour.   However, the insanity of running budget deficits during a crack boom between 2002 and 2007 when the tax receipts were rolling in meant that we were in a far worse position to counter the credit crisis with increased Government spending than if we had been more disciplined.

Brown convinced himself that he had created a permanent boom - madness.

Must have been the history degree that made him make poor decisions lol.

[doubleup]

You know there was a record deficit in 2010?  Eiminating a deficit is like turning round an oil tanker due to medium term spending commitments.  And until you reduce the deficit to zero then debt will increase each year.  The coalition have reduced the deficit by 30% or so, but haven't eliminated it.  Also note that our interest payments have gone up 50% between 2010 and 2014 as our debt continues to pile up.

If your point is that the coalition haven't been brutal enough with their cuts then I'm with you 100%.

The figures show that the deficit was mainly caused by a collapse in tax revenue NOT by excessive spending - I challenge anyone to go through the spending figures and show where the coalition has identified and eliminated significant excessive spending.

[DungBeetle]

The coalition have been terrible at reducing Government spending and waste I agree.

However the figures do NOT show that the deficit was caused by a collapse in tax revenue.   Gordon Brown ran a deficit between 2002 and 2007 when tax receipts were at a record high.   The deficit obviously increased when the credit crisis happened, but that is absolutely no excuse for running a deficit during a massive boom.   

[DMorgan]

I'm having a hard time remembering which of the political parties back in '05/'06/'07 was calling for everyone to slow down and plan for the 'inevitable' collapse that the Blair and Brown governments didn't see coming but that everyone else did.

Google is having a hard time remembering also.

This one from the 2005 general election campaign did raise a smile though

'Both main oppostion parties hoped to score points over Labour on tuition fees. Labour planned to treble fees from 2006 for English university students to fund an expansion of university places.

The Tories and Lib Dems would scrap fees, but the Tories would pay through higher interest charges on student loans, while the Lib Dems would increase income tax.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/6994476.stm

[TightEnd]

there are faults on all sides

the coalition has, at best, stabilised the deficit and has found it politically difficult to cut spending, reduce waste etc

from 2002-09 the Labour government ratcheted up spending and the deficit during the upswing in the cycle, to no long term effect on quality of services, such that when the crash came the decrease in tax revenues from major sources you had a double whammy

whilst you cannot say that the crash was the UK government's fault running the public finances on the assumption that the economic cycle was a thing of the past was at best naive and at worst reckless

at the current stage the public finances bear the cost of financial bail outs but not the (supposed) benefits of re-privatising/sell offs too

the lines these days are blurred between the parties anyway. The tories cut far less than myth would have it and after all, big picture the government that deregulated our financial services was a Labour one, and (with hindsight) that deregulation made the financial crash a lot more difficult to stem when it happened

exactly the same in the US where Fed policeeis of deregulation and excess credit caused far bigger economic swings than would otherwise have been expected

[doubleup]

The coalition have been terrible at reducing Government spending and waste I agree.

However the figures do NOT show that the deficit was caused by a collapse in tax revenue.   Gordon Brown ran a deficit between 2002 and 2007 when tax receipts were at a record high.   The deficit obviously increased when the credit crisis happened, but that is absolutely no excuse for running a deficit during a massive boom.   

Where would you cut the spending? - its all there in the link

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

[doubleup]

the government that deregulated our financial services was a Labour one, and (with hindsight) that deregulation made the financial crash a lot more difficult to stem when it happened

The significant deregulation started in the Thatcher era.  Labour actually brought in statutory regulation rather than Thatcherite regulation by SROs.

The key Labour error was "light touch" concept where banking was concerned (the Tories wanted an even lighter touch) and the move to FSA banking regulation (they simply weren't up to it).

[TightEnd]

the government that deregulated our financial services was a Labour one, and (with hindsight) that deregulation made the financial crash a lot more difficult to stem when it happened

The significant deregulation started in the Thatcher era.  Labour actually brought in statutory regulation rather than Thatcherite regulation by SROs.

The key Labour error was "light touch" concept where banking was concerned (the Tories wanted an even lighter touch) and the move to FSA banking regulation (they simply weren't up to it).

right, not enough talent or robust enough processes in the FSA to implement the system required

but this is what i mean by blurred lines. A labour party of foot/kinnock etc doesn't introduce or continue "light blue" policies, a centre-ish goverment of blair and brown does

the government of blair's second term onwards wanted the best of both worlds....deregulation (tory) and increased spending (labour). Brown definitely opined regularly on the end of economic cycle.

once an exogenous shock hits the system the combination of higher structural deficit and systemic deregulation is lethal.

[DungBeetle]

I'm having a hard time remembering which of the political parties back in '05/'06/'07 was calling for everyone to slow down and plan for the 'inevitable' collapse that the Blair and Brown governments didn't see coming but that everyone else did.

Google is having a hard time remembering also.

This one from the 2005 general election campaign did raise a smile though

'Both main oppostion parties hoped to score points over Labour on tuition fees. Labour planned to treble fees from 2006 for English university students to fund an expansion of university places.

The Tories and Lib Dems would scrap fees, but the Tories would pay through higher interest charges on student loans, while the Lib Dems would increase income tax.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/6994476.stm

Oh yes - the Tories supported the spending as well once Cameron was at the helm.  That is because Howard (or was it Hague even) ran a general election along the lines of reduced waste and measured Government expenditure and was anihilated.

Who would have thought - the electorate don't like having their sweeties taken away and politicians desperate for power like Cameron respond to their wishes.

Cameron being weak doesn't excuse deficit spending by the incumbent Government during a boom though.

[doubleup]

the government that deregulated our financial services was a Labour one, and (with hindsight) that deregulation made the financial crash a lot more difficult to stem when it happened

The significant deregulation started in the Thatcher era.  Labour actually brought in statutory regulation rather than Thatcherite regulation by SROs.

The key Labour error was "light touch" concept where banking was concerned (the Tories wanted an even lighter touch) and the move to FSA banking regulation (they simply weren't up to it).

right, not enough talent or robust enough processes in the FSA to implement the system required

but this is what i mean by blurred lines. A labour party of foot/kinnock etc doesn't introduce or continue "light blue" policies, a centre-ish goverment of blair and brown does

the government of blair's second term onwards wanted the best of both worlds....deregulation (tory) and increased spending (labour). Brown definitely opined regularly on the end of economic cycle.

once an exogenous shock hits the system the combination of higher structural deficit and systemic deregulation is lethal.

That was an idiotic concept, although the absence of inflation despite an obvious credit boom deluded policymakers (apparently oblivious to the fact that globalisation was the cause of the increased supply).

[DungBeetle]

The coalition have been terrible at reducing Government spending and waste I agree.

However the figures do NOT show that the deficit was caused by a collapse in tax revenue.   Gordon Brown ran a deficit between 2002 and 2007 when tax receipts were at a record high.   The deficit obviously increased when the credit crisis happened, but that is absolutely no excuse for running a deficit during a massive boom.   

Where would you cut the spending? - its all there in the link

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

Health, Pensions, Welfare.

We simply don't generate enough tax as a country to justify the largesse in these areas.  The NHS is a bottomless unaccountable pit, and the state pensions are unsustainable unfortunately.

I'd also address public sector pensions.  They would all have their current benefits frozen and be moved to defined benefit schemes effective immediately.

The item of welfare I'd slash would be housing benefit.  If you can't afford to pay for your own accomodation then you won't be living in London

The chances of a party with these policies being voted in are precisely ZERO so nobody needs to worry.

[mulhuzz]

The coalition have been terrible at reducing Government spending and waste I agree.

However the figures do NOT show that the deficit was caused by a collapse in tax revenue.   Gordon Brown ran a deficit between 2002 and 2007 when tax receipts were at a record high.   The deficit obviously increased when the credit crisis happened, but that is absolutely no excuse for running a deficit during a massive boom.   

Where would you cut the spending? - its all there in the link

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

Health, Pensions, Welfare.

We simply don't generate enough tax as a country to justify the largesse in these areas.  The NHS is a bottomless unaccountable pit, and the state pensions are unsustainable unfortunately.

I'd also address public sector pensions.  They would all have their current benefits frozen and be moved to defined benefit schemes effective immediately.

The item of welfare I'd slash would be housing benefit.  If you can't afford to pay for your own accomodation then you won't be living in London

The chances of a party with these policies being voted in are precisely ZERO so nobody needs to worry.

aye because social and geographical mobility are famously at an all time high.

let's just shoot the poor as well.

[Woodsey]

The coalition have been terrible at reducing Government spending and waste I agree.

However the figures do NOT show that the deficit was caused by a collapse in tax revenue.   Gordon Brown ran a deficit between 2002 and 2007 when tax receipts were at a record high.   The deficit obviously increased when the credit crisis happened, but that is absolutely no excuse for running a deficit during a massive boom.   

Where would you cut the spending? - its all there in the link

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/year_spending_2014UKbn_14bc1n#ukgs302

Health, Pensions, Welfare.

We simply don't generate enough tax as a country to justify the largesse in these areas.  The NHS is a bottomless unaccountable pit, and the state pensions are unsustainable unfortunately.

I'd also address public sector pensions.  They would all have their current benefits frozen and be moved to defined benefit schemes effective immediately.

The item of welfare I'd slash would be housing benefit.  If you can't afford to pay for your own accomodation then you won't be living in London

The chances of a party with these policies being voted in are precisely ZERO so nobody needs to worry.

There are also tons of people that could also be living with family rather than having their own place paid for by the goverment.. Tough choices need to be made, our leaders on all sides are a bunch of pussies when it comes to making the tough decisions.

[arbboy]

I have always found it amazing how people seem to think they can demand to live in expensive parts of London via housing benefit when they don't have a job and someone else picking up the bill.  Assume the days of this in Westminster etc are long gone under the benefit cap the tories have bought in but some of the stories in the past were amazing.