Looking forward to the Tory Conference this week where hopefully Johnson and Mogg will get a good smattering of eggs and tomatoes on their best suits.
To those of you, out there, with a more political brain than me (most of you I reckon), what are your thoughts on this? http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/...-created-two-thirds-of-the-uks-national-debt/
It might be more relevant to have a mathematical brain than a political one. The author starts by telling us that Labour had been in power for 28 years and Conservatives for 48 years .... I didn’t read the rest of it (mainly because I’m Not good reading that type of data) but one party has been in power for nearly two thirds of that time period and created two thirds of the debt.
It's also a difficult thing to evaluate given that some things are simply outside the control of any one government. The author attempts to address that in a fairly limited way regarding the 2008 crash, but governments have only limited influence on economic upturns/downturns, and the reality is that borrowing will always be higher in a downturn. How one would weight for that, I'm not sure, but without some means of doing so the data is rather meaningless. (And I'm anything but a Conservative)
It is far too simplistic. Takes spending at the time as being a result of policy made at the time. Looking as a neutral you have to look at facts that current administrations will always be having a lot of expenditure due to previous administration's policies. As an example (and I'm not trying to blame Labour blah, blah. Labour would have had similar things after taking over from the Tories) All the PFI deals made in the Blair era meant that government did not need to borrow so much through those years. However the Tory administration is now having to pay those contracts in this era. So we can argue about whether it should have been borrowed through the Blair era rather than gone the PFI route. Or we could decide to attribute the "repayments" to the era that they relate to. Like I say Labour will have had similar things but the PFI one is a pretty big one. "Borrowing" is a very subjective thing. You could argue that one administration ignored things they should have done and the other is then having to do it when they get in. You could also consider that if one party has been in 2 thirds of the time they might well have had much more of a hit from "recessions" and downturns, whereas the administration that was in for a third of the time might have actually been a bit lucky and not been hit by a third of the recession time. I haven't calculated or checked. Like I say. It is far too simplistic and in reality it doesn't mean anything because borrowing now is not necessarily to do with something you just decided to do. It can be because of past policy (or refusal to spend.) EDIT: Schad beat me to it
After his speech today, during which he undermined the Prime Minister yet again, the time has come for him to have his membership withdrawn and for Central Office to deselect him. The best thing Mrs May could do as PM, is do to Johnson what Heath did years ago with Powell. She needs to be strong against this odious fat squirt.
https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1/messages/21115?.intl=es&.lang=es-ES&.partner=none&.src=fp Is this (the Express) the worst newspaper in Europe? It must be to pander to the likes of Trump and to rail against Mrs May´s "Chequers" deal, favouuring a "no deal". And its readership love it. What is the matter with people? I feel they must be psychos to support the likes of Trump and the AfUK party that has now taken over large parts of the grassroots membership of the former UK Conservative party.
It’s definitely up (or down) there. It’s basically The Mail on steroids, and as convincing an argument as it is possible to make that press freedom is not always the universal good that media people claim it is.
I think it was the party formerly known as the Coservatives and Unionists who have lost the plot with so many members whose views are more akin to AfD in Germany than with true pan-European ideals and values, as defined by Angela Merkel´s CD party. The UK Conservatives should be standing alongside this party in shaping the economic, social, and international policies of the EU, and not trying to press a closer relationship with the current US administration. UK, going it alone ..
www.brexitshambles.com/why-is-the-uk-government-so-keen-on-no-deal-the-astonishing-truth-behind-the-illusion-of-democracy/ In case you have not read this article, well worth a read and thinking over. Some are undoubtedly aware of the real reason behind Brexit, others might be caught by surprise.
Trump Weaponizes Victimhood to Defend Kavanaugh FACEBOOK WATCH This is excellent!! Trevor Noah puts it in a nutshell how Trump and others like Johnson and Farage are so manipulative in generating people´s feelings to "win" an argument as opposed to the reality and logic.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/06/uk-musician-warn-botched-brexit If Brexit is going to impact the music industry as set out in this article in the Observer, then it is going to impact football as well. Ending free movement will make it harder for us to move around Europe either watching our team play, going on holiday, or going on business trips. Time to get the banners prepared, take them along to grounds all around the country and put these on prominent display.
Young people with deposits still cannot buy homes.......... When I saw this headline I had to re-read it several times I could not believe what I was seeing. Although having said that my young granddaughter is in a similar position. She and her partner and little one are living with her partners mother who wants to move into a flat. Her partner has a 5% stake in the house already (left to him by his dad) my Granddaughter through legacies and saving has a tad under £10000. In other words together they had the equivalent to nigh on £22000. The house valuer said the house was around £235000. They were apparently turned down by their bank for a mortgage not because of their joint earnings but because they didn't have enough deposit!!!!!!!! Roughly £1500 short. Both are in their mid twenties. I could not believe the attitude of the bank for £1500......However they were adamant the young couple couldn't have a mortgage. It is no wonder our society is going to pot at the moment..........If mortgage lenders don't have a better understanding of young peoples problems how on earth are they going to get onto the housing market??? I really despair for young people and the housing market....I really do.......
Whilst it's sad that its getting harder and harder for young people to get onto the housing ladder, these deposit requirements etc is because of regulation which was bought about because lenders were far too easily doling out loans like they were going out of fashion in the 2000s. As with all regulation, it needs to be simple with cut off limits which unfortunately does not deal with complex situations and peoples finances but make it easy to interpret.
